- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 07 Nov 2016 19:37:55 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29959 --- Comment #6 from Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> --- I see - I hadn't understood the implication of the conformance statement. Are there tests for it? But our wording is still fuzzy: e.g. since we don't have updating functions, is it actually meaningful? Since people are implementing fn:transform() I'm leaning towards removing fn:put altogether although having an fn:put optionally defined in terms of fn:transform is still more appealing to me, as it makes it more likely to be available. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 7 November 2016 19:38:02 UTC