Subject: RE: Re: XPath 2.0: Problems with the two boolean constants true and false
From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 01:18:52 -0700 (PDT)
|
> > But if the Data Model were saying that 0 and 1 are not simply
> > "string representations" (note that I didn't use '0' and '1'
> > in my previous example but just 0 and 1 -- that is not the
> > strins '0' and '1') but that 0 and 1 are *the* two xs:boolean
> > constants,
> >
> > then
> >
> > it would make difference as the result of evaluating a
> > boolean expression would be not a "representation" but a real
> > (or native, or genuine) boolean value.
> >
> > Isn't it natural for a type to have its own genuine values
> > and not only a "representation"?
>
> The boolean type does have its own genuine values. There are two of
> these values, and they are delivered by the functions true() and
> false().
>
> I really can't see how choosing integers to represent these values helps
> matters.
The functions true() and false() are themselves defined using "The
xs:boolean value 'true' and The xs:boolean value 'false'."
http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#d1e2699
Defining 'true' and 'false' using the functions true() and false() makes
both definitions circular and incorrect.
Therefore, there must be a way to define true and false independently from
the functions true() and false() -- this definition must provide a means
to determine if a given value "is the value true or is the value false"
without referencing functions, which themselves are defined using the
values true and false.
=====
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|