[Bug 21634] New: format-number() suffix definition seems wrong

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=21634

            Bug ID: 21634
           Summary: format-number() suffix definition seems wrong
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Candidate Recommendation
          Hardware: All
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Functions and Operators 3.0
          Assignee: mike@saxonica.com
          Reporter: paul@lucasmail.org
        QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org

XQuery Functions and Operators 3.0, section 4.7.4, says in part:

> The suffix is set to contain all passive characters to the right of the rightmost active character in the fractional part of the sub-picture.

Why doesn't that mirror the prefix definition?  The prefix definition is:

> The prefix is set to contain all passive characters in the sub-picture to the left of the leftmost active character.

Specifically, why does the definition for suffix include "the fractional part
of"? Why isn't the definition of suffix worded as:

> The suffix is set to contain all passive characters to the right of the rightmost active character in the the sub-picture.

Including "the fractional part of" implies that, if there is no fractional
part, then there can be no suffix.

For example, for the picture string "1%", the % character is considered
"passive" according to section 4.7.3; yet the current wording implies that
there is no suffix because the % does not occur in the fractional part.  The
upshot is that, according to the formatting rules in 4.7.5, the % will NEVER be
included in the result string.

However, if the wording is changed as I've proposed, then the % automatically
becomes part of the suffix and gets included in the result as expected.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2013 02:54:34 UTC