[Bug 22456] New: [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 22456] New: [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22456

            Bug ID: 22456
           Summary: [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Candidate Recommendation
          Hardware: PC
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Functions and Operators 3.0
          Assignee: [hidden email]
          Reporter: [hidden email]
        QA Contact: [hidden email]

F+O contains function definitions corresponding to the operators "is", <<, >>,
"union", "except" and "intersect". The operator mapping table also contains
entries for these operators. However, the specification of the constructs that
use these operators (for example NodeComp, UnionExpr) is complete in itself and
makes no reference to the operator mapping table or to the functions in F+O.
There is therefore a lack of clarity as to whether the function specifications
carry any force.

This does not apply to value comparison, general comparison, and arithmetic
operators, where the language specification explicitly appeals to the operator
mapping table and the corresponding functions.

Background: A Saxon user asked why ($N << ()) returns empty, rather than a type
error, given the specification of op:node-before(). F+O claims that
op:node-before defines the semantics of the << operator. I couldn't point to a
chain of argument that shows that op:is-node-before() is relevant to the
semantics of ($A << $B) when both $A and $B are nodes, but is not relevant
where either operand is an empty sequence.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 22456] [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22456

Jonathan Robie <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #1 from Jonathan Robie <[hidden email]> ---
The operator mapping table does not take things like atomization, etc. into
account. These things are defined in XQuery / XPath.

DECIDED: Mike Kay will clarify that the operator mapping does not fully define
the semantics of the operator, but only the mapping applied to values of
particular types.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 22456] [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22456

--- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
The WG noted the problem, but decided to make minimal changes to the spec given
the current stage of development. The notes in F+O describing the operator
mapping will be slightly reworded to indicate (in particular for << and >>)
that the function defines the semantics of the operator only in the case where
the supplied operands are nodes.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 22456] [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22456

Michael Kay <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
          Component|XPath 3.0                   |XPath 3.1
         Resolution|FIXED                       |---

--- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
Reopening as a 3.1 problem. The specification of operators such as "<<" and
">>" in the XPath book makes no reference to the operator mapping table or to
F+O, so we have two specifications of these operators and no statement as to
how they relate.

Personally, I'd be very happy to get rid of them from F+O.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 22456] [XP 3.0] Non-polymorphic operators

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
In reply to this post by Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22456

Michael Kay <[hidden email]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Severity|normal                      |minor

--- Comment #4 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
Decided that this is editorial (changes the way the language is defined, does
not change hte language) and therefore can be considered during Last Call.

--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.