- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 09:36:23 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29586 --- Comment #19 from John Snelson <john.snelson@marklogic.com> --- (In reply to Tim Mills from comment #18) > (In reply to John Snelson from comment #17) > > (In reply to Tim Mills from comment #16) > > > In "2.5.5.8 Map Test", replace the text > > > > > > "The function signature of the map, ... the required return type." > > > > > > with > > > > > > "The function signature of a map matching type map(K, V), treated as a > > > function, is function(xs:anyAtomicType) as V?. It is thus always a subtype > > > of function(xs:anyAtomicType) as item()* regardless of the actual types of > > > the keys and values in the map. > > > > I think this text is unclear what to do in the case where no static typing > > information is available. We need that case to be the default, and for the > > text to allow a better type (a subtype of map(K,V)). > > If the processor has sufficient information available (e.g. it knows that > the item matches type map(K, V), it can avoid coercion. Otherwise (it only > knows that the item is map(*), it has to be pessimitic and introduce > coercion. However, from the point of view of the user, there is no > observable difference. I think we agree on the principle. I just think the text doesn't explain it very well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2016 09:36:27 UTC