Re: XPath is NOT a functional language

>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Kay <mhk@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

    Michael> most of the definitions of the term "functional language"
    Michael> do not require this concept, and are aligned with the way
    Michael> the XPath spec uses the term.

    Michael> See for example
    Michael> http://www.google.com/search?q=define:functional+language

I looked. two definitions, neither of which are satisfied bu XPath.

Anyway, this "definition" of a functional language within the XPath
draft is not referred to anywhere else, so why not remove the
definition and just say that expressions can be nested with full generality?
-- 
Colin Paul Adams
Preston Lancashire