1767 2005-07-19 23:57:19 +0000 [FS] technical: 7.2.13 The fn:subsequence function: incorrect typing? 2005-10-13 13:17:50 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT Formal Semantics 1.0 Last Call drafts All All CLOSED FIXED P2 normal --- 1 jmdyck simeon public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 4954 0 jmdyck 2005-07-19 23:57:19 +0000 7.2.13 The fn:subsequence function STA / rule 5 If quantifier(Type) in { 1, + }, I don't think you're guaranteed that the result type has the same quantifier. Are you missing a "· ?" in the conclusion? 5036 1 simeon 2005-07-20 21:45:51 +0000 The working group agrees with your comment. The rule is bogus, and should have a ? at the end. also the ''' in the conclusion of the inferrence rule has to be removed. this results in the following inference rule. statEnv |- Expr : Type statEnv |- Expr1 : xs:double statEnv |- Expr2 : xs:double -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- statEnv |- fn:subsequence(Expr, Expr1, Expr2) : prime(Type) · quantifier(Type) - Jerome 5043 2 jmdyck 2005-07-20 22:22:58 +0000 Uh, except that you left out the '?' again. 6683 3 simeon 2005-10-13 13:17:50 +0000 Yes, you are right. The '?' is used as expected in the latest published draft. See: http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-xquery-semantics-20050915/#sec_fn_subsequence - Jerome