- 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