- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 21:34:26 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26958 --- Comment #18 from C. M. Sperberg-McQueen <cmsmcq@blackmesatech.com> --- With respect to comment 16, I do not think the argument "the text already does X, therefore we should not entertain objections to the text doing X" is a sound one, even if the text does in fact do X. All of the occurrences of 'Creates a new map ...' and similar could easily be replaced, without loss of clarity, by 'Returns a map ...' or 'Evaluates to a map ...'. In the case where the map passed in as an argument is deep-equal() to the map returned, the current wording can (as JR points out) be read as dictating the creation of a new map rather than potentially returning the same map (assuming that maps have intensional identity and not extensional identity). If the existence of words in the current draft of a spec is taken as committing the WG to every view of the world that can be read out of things, and requires extraordinary measures to change, then the result will be to make WG members inordinately cautions about accepting draft wording. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 4 November 2014 21:34:28 UTC