• From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@g...>
• To: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:34:53 +0200

On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:13 PM, Michael Kay <mike@s...> wrote:
> In fact, using XML as the syntactic basis has many benefits. The most
> notable one for me is that it is very easy to extend the language: whereas
> XQuery goes through anguish every time a new construct is added, because of
> the ambiguities and inconsistencies introduced by new grammar, XSLT is
> infinitely extensible through new elements and attributes with no problems
> at all.

(started new subject line as this diverges)

how much is the current xquery draft http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-11/

tracking http://www.w3.org/TR/xqueryx/

Were there arguments ever to model the grammer with xml then derive a
shorthand version of XQuery e.g. you have mentioned the benefits but
what are the limitations ?

Also we saw some extensions at XML Prague of xquery (presented by
Matthias Brantner)
http://www.xmlprague.cz/2010/sessions.html#Extending-XQuery-with-Collections-Indexes-and-Integrity-Constraints

I found this to be rare demonstration of how XQuery can be extended
with a minimum of fuss and wondered if you had any opinions on this as
well.

James Fuller

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: xquery v1.1 tracking xquery x was Re: RE: Declarative programming requires a different mindset
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>