[Bug 26173] New: [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()

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

[Bug 26173] New: [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26173

            Bug ID: 26173
           Summary: [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()
           Product: XPath / XQuery / XSLT
           Version: Working drafts
          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]

>From Dimitre Novachev on xsl-list today:


So, to summarize, Wolfgang and I found three issues in the
specification of the fold -xxx functions:

     1. The Error Conditions paragraph for fold-left conflicts with
the signature of the function.

     2. The Error Conditions paragraph for fold-right conflicts with
the signature of the function.

     3. The Rules section (code) for fold-right conflicts the
signature of the function.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 26173] [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()

Bugzilla from bugzilla@jessica.w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26173

--- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
The relevant message can be found here

http://markmail.org/message/xqrtczzqa7dklj6x

See also the subsequent thread.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 26173] [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()

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=26173

--- Comment #2 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
Note also that in the equivalent XQuery function given for fold-left, there is
a missing comma after the $seq argument in the function signature. Fixed in the
3.1 spec.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[Bug 26173] [f+o 3.0] fold-left()/fold-right()

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=26173

Michael Kay <[hidden email]> changed:

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

--- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <[hidden email]> ---
For fold-left() we have a simple editorial problem:

1. In the error description for fold-left(), change "and the second is $seq or
any trailing subsequence of $seq." to "and the second is any single item from
$seq".

For fold-right() we have a slightly deeper problem.

In the function signature proforma, we say that the supplied function has
signature

$f as function(item()*, item()) as item()*

But then we say the effect of the function is equivalent to one in which $f is
declared as

$f as function(item(), item()*) as item()*

So the question is, which should we adopt? In the first case, the signature is
assuming that the "accumulated value" (starting from $zero) comes first, and
the item from the supplied $seq comes second. The other version assumes the
opposite. The prose description of the error condition agrees with the second
interpretation, as do the examples and test cases. So I think it is the
function proforma we have to change: it becomes $f as function(item(), item()*)
as item()*.

I have made these changes to the 3.1 specification and have noted them (in the
changes.txt file) for any future 3.0 errata.

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