1464 2005-05-18 19:06:11 +0000 [XSLT] Typo in formating a float? 2005-07-22 16:19:20 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT XSLT 2.0 Last Call drafts PC Windows XP CLOSED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 mrys mike public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 3194 0 mrys 2005-05-18 19:06:11 +0000 16.4.4 Formatting the Number: Should the following text "the one that is chosen should be one with the smallest possible number of digits not counting leading or trailing zeroes. (For example, 1.0 is preferred to 0.9999999999, and 100000000 is preferred to 100000001.) " be "the one that is chosen should be one with the smallest possible number of digits not counting leading or trailing zeroes. (For example, 1.0 is preferred to 0.9999999999, and 1.00000000 is preferred to 1.00000001.) " ? 5022 1 sca.w3c 2005-07-20 20:15:32 +0000 Michael, this was intentional - not a typo - thanks for your concern. 5025 2 mrys 2005-07-20 20:28:10 +0000 It may be better than to use 1.0E8 is preferred over 1.00000001E8. Best regards Michael 5087 3 mike 2005-07-21 20:19:12 +0000 Clearly examples are non-normative, and are there only to help the reader to understand the normative text. The normative text here is "the smallest possible number of digits not counting leading or trailing zeroes", and the example "100000000 is preferred to 100000001" was chosen deliberately to make it clear that by "leading or trailing zeros" we mean significant as well as non-significant leading or trailing zeros. Your alternative examples are correct, but don't make the point that we were trying to make. But thanks for your concern. Michael Kay (as Editor, XSLT 2.0) 5089 4 mrys 2005-07-21 20:29:01 +0000 Sorry, but this does not make sense as written. Leading and trailing zeros are normally understood to be only the ones that are insignificant. Since you say that the example is non-normative, you should make it clear in the normative part and explain in the example, that you count the zeros for 100000001 but not the ones in 10000000. 5105 5 mike 2005-07-21 21:35:35 +0000 It's precisely because many readers might wrongly assume that "leading and trailing zeros" means "insignificant leading and trailing zeros" that we have added examples to demonstrate that we mean exactly what we say, and not something different that the reader might have assumed. Michael Kay 5106 6 mrys 2005-07-21 21:37:30 +0000 But the example is not self-explanatory since you do not make it explicit in the normative part. At least not to me and probably many other readers either. 5118 7 mike 2005-07-22 00:15:50 +0000 I will add the redundant qualifier "(whether significant or insignificant)" for the benefit of readers who need it spelled out. 5144 8 sca.w3c 2005-07-22 16:19:20 +0000 With Michael Kay's final comment I would expect that this now satisfies your comment. I will close it - reopen if you must.