27499 2014-12-03 19:20:07 +0000 Editorial problems with XQuery Update Facility 3.0 draft dated 2014-12-03 2015-01-07 20:46:37 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified XPath / XQuery / XSLT Update 3.0 Last Call drafts All All CLOSED FIXED P2 minor --- 1 jim.melton john.snelson public-qt-comments oldest_to_newest 115844 0 jim.melton 2014-12-03 19:20:07 +0000 I have reviewed the 2014-12-03 draft of the XQuery Update Facility 3.0 candidate LCWD document and have discovered the following editorial issues that I commend to the principal editor for his resolution: 1) section 4.5 text says "...if the value for a..." Perhaps it should say "...if the StringLiteral for a..." or "...if the value of the StringLiteral for a..." 2) section 5.8 text says "...if the value for a..." Perhaps it should say "...if the PragmaContents for a..." or "...if the value of the PragmaContents for a..." 3) section 7.1, Additional Semantics item 1 says: Any pending update lists returned... Perhaps it should say: Pending update lists, if any, returned... or All pending update lists returned... 4) section 7.4, 3rd bullet reads: If query mode is query, an error is raised if test is an updating expression [err:XUST0001]. It should read: If query mode is query and test is an updating expression, an error is raised [err:XUST0001]. 5) sections 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3, 3rd bullet (in all three sections) have the same sort of problem as section 7.4, 3rd bullet. 6) sections 7.10 and 7.11, the last paragraph (in both sections) says: Any pending update lists returned... It should say: Pending update lists, if any, returned... or All pending update lists returned... 7) sections 7.12, 7.14, and 7.15, second bullet (in all three sections) contains: If any operand expressions... It should contain: If any operand expression... That is, the plural should be singular. 8) Appendix B, item 4 reads: The default quer" mode for this implementation. It should read: The default query mode for this implementation. 59 The definition of "vacuous expression" contains the phrase "REMOVE ME:" followed by two sentences. Is the intent that the entire definition be removed? 115860 1 john.snelson 2014-12-03 20:16:01 +0000 Thanks Jim, I've fixed those now.