[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: XSLT and XQuery

  • To: "Evan D. Lenz" <elenz@x...>, "Mike Champion" <mc@x...>, <xml-dev@l...>
  • Subject: RE: XSLT and XQuery
  • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@s...>
  • Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 14:31:36 -0500
  • In-reply-to: <NDBBLMPNADEOOKGELJALCEFPCHAA.elenz@s...>
  • References: <GFZTIHNOI52FA4WZDCSOPOHC4WXV8.3c3aec7c@s...>

RE:  XSLT and XQuery
At 10:44 AM 1/8/2002 -0800, Evan D. Lenz wrote:
>Mike Champion wrote:
> > Someone from XQuery will have to answer, and perhaps to correct my
> > understanding that it is the schema/typing issue that creates the biggest
> > constraint on the schedule.
>
>I personally agree with this assessment.

I think that over the last year, the biggest issue has been integration 
with XPath. At this point, the typing issues are front and center, 
particularly issues involving substitutability and named typing. I think we 
are pretty much on track with these issues, though.

> >  All I can say is that the XQuery people seem to
> > believe that type system issues are central to their critique of
> > XPath 1.0, their work to date, and as a differentiator between
> > XSLT and XQuery.
>
>It may be a differentiator in terms of how the fallback mechanism is
>ultimately employed, but it doesn't imply any independence between the two.

I agree with Evan here. The two languages are joined at the hip, and both 
use the type system of XQuery.

>It's not as
>if XPath 2.0 as currently specified can be declared a minimal victory; it's
>completely dependent on the as-of-yet unspecified XQuery type system.

As yet unspecified? As a member of the XSL WG, surely you have read the 
specification for the type system:

http://web3.w3.org/TR/query-algebra/

You are also familiar with the issues, especially structural vs. named 
typing. Are you saying that the type system is not specified until we close 
all the issues? Or perhaps you are referring to the fact that we delayed 
publication of the Formal Semantics so that it could track developments in 
the XQuery language?

> > As for the idea of coming back and layering the typing in XQuery 2.0,
> > my understanding is that solving "strong typing" requires that XPath
> > 2.0 and XQuery be designed as a unit, even if they are layered once
> > everything is done.
>
>Right.

Yep.

Jonathan


PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
 

Stylus Studio has published XML-DEV in RSS and ATOM formats, enabling users to easily subcribe to the list from their preferred news reader application.


Stylus Studio Sponsored Links are added links designed to provide related and additional information to the visitors of this website. they were not included by the author in the initial post. To view the content without the Sponsor Links please click here.

Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.