1389 2005-05-11 07:41:48 +0000 [XQuery] some editorial comments on A.4 Precedence Order 2005-09-29 09:33:19 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XQuery 1.0 Last Call drafts All All CLOSED FIXED P2 minor --- 1 jmdyck scott_boag public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 3416 0 jmdyck 2005-05-11 07:41:48 +0000 A.4 Precedence Order It should be clearer whether this section is merely summarizing information that appears elsewhere, or else is telling me something about the language that I couldn't deduce from the rest of the spec. Does it change the set of legal queries? 4472 1 scott_boag 2005-07-09 21:20:39 +0000 (In reply to comment #0) > A.4 Precedence Order > > It should be clearer whether this section is merely summarizing information that > appears elsewhere, or else is telling me something about the language that I > couldn't deduce from the rest of the spec. I think it's clear enough. > > Does it change the set of legal queries? No. This is a sore point for me, I think the section is unnecessary and redundent. But a lot of our WG thinks it's helpful, so there you have it. It is probably useful for users to have the handy table. 5164 2 scott_boag 2005-07-22 19:33:31 +0000 A joint meeting of the Query and XSLT working groups considered this comment on July 20, 2005. The WGs agreed to resolve these editorial issues as listed in my previous comment. In this case this means not to make a change. If you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Reopened. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision. 5178 3 jmdyck 2005-07-22 20:54:34 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > I think the section is unnecessary and redundent. But a > lot of our WG thinks it's helpful, so there you have it. > It is probably useful for users to have the handy table. If a section is unnecessary and redundant, but helpful and useful, wouldn't it normally be made non-normative? 6583 4 chamberl 2005-09-29 09:32:44 +0000 Michael, On Sept. 29, 2005, the Query Working Group decided to make the following changes to XQuery Appendix A.4 (Precedence Order): (1) "The grammar defines ..." will be changed to "The grammar in A.1 normatively defines ...". (2) "These operators are summarized here in order of their precedence from lowest to highest" will be changed to "These operators are summarized here to make clear the order of their precedence from lowest to highest". The working group believes that these changes address your concerns about defining the relationship between the grammar and the precedence table. Therefore we have closed this comment. If you are not satisfied with this resolution, please reopen the comment. Regards, Don Chamberlin (on behalf of the Query Working Group)