W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-qt-comments@w3.org > April 2016

[Bug 29555] [FO31] 9.8.4.2 The Width Modifier

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2016 15:35:47 +0000
To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-29555-523-dFsoXRuMBh@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29555

--- Comment #7 from Josh Spiegel <josh.spiegel@oracle.com> ---
On the last call, I think the decision was that grouping separators will
contribute to the effective maximum width but will not contribute to the
minimum width.  And comment 1 above proposes ".. while #'##9 defines a minimum
width of 1 and a maximum of 5". And then "... rule is that truncation of
significant high-order digits occurs only for the year component, and it occurs
if the maximum width has been set either implicitly (using the first
presentation modifier) or explicitly (using the width modifier)."

This is also consistent with the specification which says "In the case of the
year component, setting max-width requests omission of high-order digits from
the year, for example, if max-width is set to 2 then the year 2003 will be
output as 03."

So putting this all together, I would expect this query:

  declare variable $dt := xs:date("2014-01-01");
  format-date($dt, "[Y0-0]")

To produce:

  "2-0-1-4"

Since the maximum is 3.

I would then expect this query:

  declare variable $dt := xs:date("2014-01-01");
  format-date($dt, "[Y00]")

To produce:

  "14"

Since the maximum is 2.

I don't think it makes sense that grouping separators should impact the
decision to truncate the year.  Or am I missing something?

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2016 15:35:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:58:00 UTC