> Do you think fn:unparsed-text() should be different with respect to
> determinism than fn:doc() (and fn:document(), come to that)? Or do you
> think they should also be nondeterministic?

There is no reason why doc() and document() should be "more deterministic"
than unparsed-text().

I don't expect that anyone wrote XSLT code that relies on these functions
being deterministic. Thus, correcting the tagging in a future specification
and implementing them the right way is not likely to result in
compatibility issues.

Cheers,
Dimitre

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 2:26 AM Norm Tovey-Walsh ndw@xxxxxxxxxx <
xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Dimitre Novatchev dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx <
> xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > It seems to me that tagging the function unparsed-text() as
> "deterministic"
> > was rather inaccurate... And definitely not useful, if we need hacks as
> > workarounds for its limitations...
>
> Do you think fn:unparsed-text() should be different with respect to
> determinism than fn:doc() (and fn:document(), come to that)? Or do you
> think they should also be nondeterministic?
>
> (I donbt feel strongly one way or the other, Ibm just wondering about
> the distinction.)
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Tovey-Walsh <ndw@xxxxxxxxxx>
> https://nwalsh.com/
>
> > If you don't have the time to do it right, where are you going to find
> > the time to do it over?