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

RE: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour

• To: "'Jonathan Robie'" <jonathan.robie@d...>,"'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@m...>,"'Rick Jelliffe'" <ricko@a...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2003 17:52:08 +0100
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <6.0.0.22.2.20030930104854.01f8bbe0@n...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

> I think that the data types of XML Schema Part 2 would have 
> to be a given. 

I think that if one wanted to, one could define something that was
recognizably XQuery using any set of atomic types that provides
booleans, strings, and some kind of number. All that's needed is to
associate the semantics of functions and operators with the chosen set
of types, and decouple them from the language syntax, so that a
different set of types gives you a slightly different set of functions
and operators (or slightly different semantics for the same operators).

Many of the problems in glueing XQuery/XPath to XML Schema have arisen,
of course, because the XML Schema types had no behaviors defined, or
because the behaviors they did define (such as equality and ordering)
were inappropriate for query purposes.

Michael Kay

• References:
  • RE: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Beyond Ontologies
• Next by Date: ISO pulls back
• Previous by thread: RE: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour
• Next by thread: Re: FW: [ANN]: XQuery: A Guided Tour
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread