- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 14:37:05 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26173
Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|--- |FIXED
--- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> ---
For fold-left() we have a simple editorial problem:
1. In the error description for fold-left(), change "and the second is $seq or
any trailing subsequence of $seq." to "and the second is any single item from
$seq".
For fold-right() we have a slightly deeper problem.
In the function signature proforma, we say that the supplied function has
signature
$f as function(item()*, item()) as item()*
But then we say the effect of the function is equivalent to one in which $f is
declared as
$f as function(item(), item()*) as item()*
So the question is, which should we adopt? In the first case, the signature is
assuming that the "accumulated value" (starting from $zero) comes first, and
the item from the supplied $seq comes second. The other version assumes the
opposite. The prose description of the error condition agrees with the second
interpretation, as do the examples and test cases. So I think it is the
function proforma we have to change: it becomes $f as function(item(), item()*)
as item()*.
I have made these changes to the 3.1 specification and have noted them (in the
changes.txt file) for any future 3.0 errata.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 10 September 2014 14:37:07 UTC