- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 16:34:59 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29341 Bug ID: 29341 Summary: [XP31] "Unreadable" sounds too strong and opinionating, for lack of a better word Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT Version: Candidate Recommendation Hardware: PC OS: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: editorial Priority: P2 Component: XPath 3.1 Assignee: jonathan.robie@gmail.com Reporter: abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl QA Contact: public-qt-comments@w3.org Target Milestone: --- (OT: the online translator gave "ballyhoo" for the Dutch "stemmingmakerij", but I doubt that's a proper expression. I just mean to say that the word, as used in that sentence, reads as the view of the writer, which I think we should try to prevent.) Section 3.22 Arrow operator: This syntax is particularly helpful when conventional function call syntax is unreadable... I prefer something like: This syntax is particularly helpful when conventional function call syntax may make code harder to read.... Perhaps I'm a bit over-pedantic, not a big deal I guess, but I find "unreadable" quite strong, besides, we have lived with this older syntax for over a decade and managed quite well ;). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 17 December 2015 16:35:04 UTC