W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > February 2011

[Bug 12036] [FT] 3.4.3 Thesaurus Option

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2011 02:05:42 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Psn3u-0001rW-V3@jessica.w3.org>

Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|NEW                         |ASSIGNED

--- Comment #4 from Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org> 2011-02-25 02:05:41 UTC ---
Paul, it's both a matter of degree and a matter of incompatibility.  In
addition, it's a matter of original intent. 

First, the decision to change the BNF to require an integer value instead of a
generalized expression is compatible with implementations that allow a
generalized expression, which can be treated as an implementation extension. In
addition, it's a very small change to the spec that does, in fact, reflect
real-world usage patterns and the original intent of the spec authors. 

By contrast, the syntax and semantics discussed in Bug 12144 were heavily
discussed and debated before settling on what is currently in the specs, which
implies "original intent".  The change that you would like, and that we've
agreed to consider in a future version of the FT spec, would require a more
significant change to both the syntax of the language and to the semantics
thereof. It would also invalidate all implementations that have already
implemented the spec as currently written. 

You should know that we agonized for a long time before concluding that the
change for this bug was justifiable before going back to working draft.  The
points in the second paragraph of this comment were sufficiently convincing. 

Hope this helps!

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 Friday, 25 February 2011 02:05:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:57:34 UTC