On Tue, March 25, 2014 4:10 pm, Abel Braaksma (Exselt) wrote:
> I raised bug #24521 last month against a similar issue, see
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24521.
...
> My take on this is that both math and map functions are allowed, as well
> as constructor functions, but not XSLT functions, except for the ones
> mentioned in that definition.

My expectation always was that they would be but also that the
specification hadn't yet caught up with the intent.

> I would suggest you to raise a bug against the specification for this
> particular instance of the use of the term core functions.
>
> Oh wait, it is already there, I raised it recently in bug #24970:
> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=24970. But it is not
> explicit to your specific case. I will add it to that bug.

Thanks.  An earlier search on 'static expression' [1] hadn't turned up
anything, but I'd asked the question here rather than raising a bug just
in case there was anything that I'd missed.

Regards,


Tony Graham                                         tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx
Consultant                                       http://www.mentea.net
Chair, Print and Page Layout Community Group @ W3C    XML Guild member
  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --  --
Mentea       XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming

[1]
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/buglist.cgi?component=XSLT%203.0&list_id=34068&product=XPath%20%2F%20XQuery%20%2F%20XSLT&query_format=advanced&short_desc=static%20expression&short_desc_type=substring