- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2014 17:27:32 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=27069 --- Comment #3 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- > and secondly because I don't think it's a coding style I want to encourage Sorry, I think you misunderstand. It is not about coding style, it is about the signatures of the functions. Not about examples, but about aligning those signatures (one place for each function, either "fn:" or "map:") with the way they are defined in FO30. Similarly, we use map functions always with the map prefix (I believe it is not even allowed otherwise) and currently we define it normatively without the map prefix. While not wrong per se, it seems a bit at odds at least. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2014 17:27:34 UTC