RE: Re: XPath 2.0: Problems with the two boolean const

> >  But if the Data Model were saying that 0 and 1 are not simply 
> >  "string representations" (note that I didn't use '0' and '1' 
> >  in my previous example but just 0 and 1 -- that is not the 
> >  strins '0' and '1') but that 0 and 1 are *the* two xs:boolean 
> >  constants,
> >  
> >  then
> >  
> >  it would make difference as the result of evaluating a 
> >  boolean expression would be not a "representation" but a real 
> >  (or native, or genuine) boolean value.
> >  
> >  Isn't it natural for a type to have its own genuine values 
> >  and not only a "representation"?
> 
> The boolean type does have its own genuine values. There are two of
> these values, and they are delivered by the functions true() and
> false().
> 
> I really can't see how choosing integers to represent these values helps
> matters.

The functions true() and false() are themselves defined using "The
xs:boolean value 'true' and The xs:boolean value 'false'."
http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-functions/#d1e2699

Defining 'true' and 'false' using the functions true() and false() makes
both definitions circular and incorrect.

Therefore, there must be a way to define true and false independently from
the functions true() and false() -- this definition must provide a means
to determine if a given value "is the value true or is the value false"
without referencing functions, which themselves are defined using the
values true and false.









=====
Cheers,

Dimitre Novatchev.
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search
http://shopping.yahoo.com

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