https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29712 --- Comment #6 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- > (child::x, 23) Isn't that also U{N}? But I agree, the change wouldn't fix anything. The rationale was it would make parts of the rules more readable. But we already use "type adjusted posture and sweep" in some of the rules, which comes down to the same (if the result type is xs:string, the posture will be grounded, even on an expression like x/y/z). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.Received on Thursday, 21 July 2016 14:08:58 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:58:01 UTC