Repeated unary +/- (was: user actions)

[David Marston/Cambridge/IBM <da...@us.ibm.com>]

The latest grammar (15 November 2002) for XPath shows in Production 40:
UnaryExpr ::= ("-" | "+")* UnionExpr
meaning that you can flip the sign bit (or no-op) as much as you want.
.................David Marston

Re: Repeated unary +/- (was: user actions)

[sc...@us.ibm.com]

I'm bringing the issue up in the W3C WGs.  Let's see what happens.

> If they say you can do it, we must do it.

If we see something that doesn't make good sense, we can always push back
(with due consideration).  These drafts are not yet set in stone.

-scott

Joseph Kesselman <ke...@us.ibm.com> wrote on 02/06/2003 11:31:11 AM:

> >The latest grammar (15 November 2002) for XPath shows in Production 40:
> > UnaryExpr ::= ("-" | "+")* UnionExpr
> >meaning that you can flip the sign bit (or no-op) as much as you want.
>
> If they say you can do it, we must do it. "The worst you can call it is
> harmless."
>
> ______________________________________
> Joe Kesselman  / IBM Research
>

Re: Repeated unary +/- (was: user actions)

[Joseph Kesselman <ke...@us.ibm.com>]

>The latest grammar (15 November 2002) for XPath shows in Production 40:
> UnaryExpr ::= ("-" | "+")* UnionExpr
>meaning that you can flip the sign bit (or no-op) as much as you want.

If they say you can do it, we must do it. "The worst you can call it is 
harmless."

______________________________________
Joe Kesselman  / IBM Research