- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 03:07:59 +0000
- To: www-xml-schema-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3249 ------- Comment #3 from davep@iit.edu 2007-06-07 03:07 ------- (In reply to comment #0) > In 3.3.4.1, the definition of "constant" needs tidying up. The link is to a > definition of "enumerated constant", which doesn't make it clear whether there > are any non-enumerated constants; moreover, the definition says that constants > are undefined, which isn't helpful. There are no other constants as we use the word. (We don't use the word 'constant' linguistically to describe nouns such as '1' or 'one' (as opposed to variables, whose value may be reassigned without changing the mathematical structure under discussion). Perhaps having the definition read "(enumerated) constant". We call them enumerated because the only ones we have are those that get enumerated somewhere in the spec (as opposed to somehow being described without being explicitly mentioned). We call them undefined because they carry no preordained meaning other than the use to which we put them in the spec. Shall we explain these terms? > Related to this, In 3.3.4.1, is the distinction between INF and > positiveInfinity intended (similarly NaN and notANumber, etc)? Yes. positiveInfinity (the constant) is the value; 'INF' is its lexical representation. Similarly, notANumber is the value; 'NaN' is its lexical representation.
Received on Thursday, 7 June 2007 03:08:01 UTC