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.