Re: Looking for a shorter mapping expression

On 06 Dec 2004 08:39:10 +0000, Colin Paul Adams
<colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> "Dimtre" == Dimtre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>    Dimtre> Even the last E2 in a path expression should evaluate
>    Dimtre> either to a sequence of nodes or a sequence of atomic
>    Dimtre> values, but not a mixture of the two... I find this
>    Dimtre> unreasonably restrictive
> 
> Is it really so restrictive in practise?
> 
> Given that E1 must be a node sequence, then even if the restriction
> were not there, you would still only be gaining functions of type
> 
> [a] -> [a|b]
> 
> where a is node() and b is atomic().


Colin,

by "unreasonably restrictive" I mean that the reason for its being
restrictive is not known.

Cheers,
Dimitre.
> 
> Is that so useful?
> --
> 
> 
> Colin Paul Adams
> Preston Lancashire