- 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