- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 22:42:52 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10719 John Snelson <john.snelson@marklogic.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |john.snelson@marklogic.com Severity|normal |trivial --- Comment #1 from John Snelson <john.snelson@marklogic.com> 2010-10-12 22:42:52 UTC --- (In reply to comment #0) > 1. > On an editorial note, the $f in point 3 should be in a monospaced font. Accepted as an editorial amendment. > 2. > One reading of this text implies that the functions closure is added to the > current context, but then the dynamic context used is defined by where the > function item was declared, and so may not have these variables. I believe that conceptually a function items closure contains values (ie: XDM instances) rather than unevaluated expressions, so this makes no difference. > 3. > If $f is a function item then it is not a built-in or user-defined function > (functions and function items are different things). Thus the text never > actually says how to evaluate a function item. The text probably glosses over the distinction (or lack thereof) between functions and function items. I think it's an editorial issue to tighten this up. > It may be better to rewrite this section in two parts: The first part > explaining how a function is evaluated (mostly unchanged from XPath 2.0 / > XQuery 1.0). The second part should say (roughly) > > The result of a function call on a function item is computed in the same way as > the result of a call on the function described by the function, except that in > the case of a user-defined function the dynamic context used to evaluate the > function's body is augmented by the the set of variable values from the > function item's closure. I'll certainly consider that approach. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2010 22:42:53 UTC