Re: Comment JB-6

On 2011-10-08, at 13:51, Andy Seaborne wrote:
> 
> 
> On 07/10/11 14:54, Steve Harris wrote:
>> There's a response at
>> http://www.w3.org/2009/sparql/wiki/CommentResponse:JB-6
>> 
>> To help paragraph 2 of my response, I'm planning to add some text to
>> the query doc (probably near the start of 17.4 Operator and Function
>> Definitions) along the lines of:
> 
>> “It should be notated that any function or operator that is specified
>> to return an error under some conditions is a valid extension point.
>> That is, any implementation my return a non-error value in these
>> error cases, and still be compliant with this recommendation.”
> 
> s/notated/noted/
> s/my/may/
> s/any/an/  (style)
> s/compliant/conformant/

D'oh, and typing day.

>> Any thoughts?
> 
> I would add it in "17.6 Extensible Value Testing" and possibly put one sentence saying "see 17.6" in 17.4

Yep, that's a better fit. I've fixed the text and pushed to CVS as the first para in 17.6.

- Steve

-- 
Steve Harris, CTO, Garlik Limited
1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW, UK
+44 20 8439 8203  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD

Received on Monday, 10 October 2011 10:06:48 UTC