Re: Reference to functions (Was: RE: XPath 2.0: Collec

Jim Melton <jim dot melton at acm dot org> wrote:

> Gentlepeople...
>
> At 09:57 PM 9/7/2001 -0700 Friday, Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
>  > > As you'll see from the published data model, there is no current intention
> > > to support functions or expressions as a data type in the language.
> >
> >So, one significant and useful feature has been ignored...
> 
> While I understand why you might be disappointed, you must understand that 
> there are tradeoffs and the need for balance everywhere.  "Ignored" is most 
> certainly not the right word, since hours of discussion have been undergone.
> 
> > > So there's likely to be syntax akin to XQuery's
> >
> > > sum(for $i in //item return $i/@price * $i/@qty)
> >
> >I find this a definite step backawrds from the concise and compact syntax 
> >of XPath
> >1.0.
> 
> We are *not* talking about the syntax of XPath 2.0 here.  We're talking 
> about the specification of "Functions and Operators for XQuery 1.0 and 
> XPath 2.0"; that is, there are (at least) languages being addressed, not 
> just one.  

Then do I need to state the obvious -- that this specification has become a little
bit messy... If an Xpath expression will be allowed to contain the functions and
operators from this specification, then how can it be a true statement that "We are
*not* talking about the syntax of XPath 2.0 here" ? Should I believe that you didn't
think about XPath 2.0 at all?

And if this specification contributes to the fact that we are not 100% sure "what
we're talking about here" then is this positive and useful?

> While I want your needs to be met, yours are not the only needs 
> under consideration.  There are people/companies with demonstrated, 
> articulated needs for a query language more powerful than XPath and we are 
> trying to address those requirements, too.  Trust me, I will not personally 
> force you to use that new query language ;^)  You are more than welcome to 
> continue using XPath.
> 
> With tongue firmly in cheek,
>     Jim

Thank you for the necessary clarification -- so this is all politics, and politics
is always ugly...

Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list