Drop references to a "function registry" #983
Conversation
|
|
||
| Implementations MUST _accept_ each **REQUIRED** _function_ and | ||
| MUST _accept_ all _options_ defined as **REQUIRED** for those _functions_. | ||
| Implementations MUST _accept_ each REQUIRED _default function_ and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wouldn't make this change: I don't think it is necessary.
| @@ -34,34 +35,33 @@ Implementations MAY emit an _Unsupported Operation_ error for _options_ | |||
| or _option_ values that they cannot support. | |||
|
|
|||
| _Functions_ can define _options_. | |||
| An _option_ can be **REQUIRED** or **RECOMMENDED**. | |||
| An _option_ can be REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The formatting here is intentional. Many such below. Won't repeat.
|
About the label: I was waiting to rename it based on discussion of what the name should be 😉 |
spec/functions/number.md
Outdated
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > The option `select` does not accept the value `ordinal` because selecting | ||
| > currency values using ordinal rules makes no sense. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this (and line 523) doesn't work because it is a normative directive in a note. We should either override the option select in this function or we should make this IMPORTANT
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed these notes, as the select option was removed from :currency and :unit functions in #991.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, needed to force-push a fix, as this and a few other problems were due to the preceding merge applying incorrect changes.
spec/functions/number.md
Outdated
| > [!NOTE] | ||
| > The option `select` does not accept the value `ordinal` because selecting | ||
| > unit values using ordinal rules makes no sense. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See above comment on line 391
|
Per discussion in the 2025-02-10 teleconference, I am merging these changes. Others might be needed to meet v47 release criteria. |
As discussed previously (most recently in #974 (comment)), we should update our terminology to no longer refer to a "function registry", a term that we don't actually define.
This PR applies that change, along with some incidental cleanup. The term default function is introduced, and used where appropriate.
The GitHub label
registryshould probably also be renamed asdefault-functions.