[xquery-talk] At risk: Static typing

[Andrew Eisenberg]

Hello Torsten,

"at risk" features are part of the W3C Process [1]. We hope to have tests 
in the XML Query Test Suite for all of the XQuery features, at risk or 
otherwise. To date, we've been able to write test cases for almost 80% of 
the XQuery features, but Static Typing isn't among them. In order to 
successfully exit CR we have to have reports of two or more 
implementations of each feature.

We hope not to have to drop any of the "at risk" features. If we find that 
one or several of these features is taking significantly longer than all 
of the others, then we have the option of trimming the specification and 
proceeding on.

                                                -- Andrew
                                                (XML Query WG co-chair)

[1] World Wide Web Consortium Process Document, 7.4.3 Call for 
Implementations,
http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/process.html#cfi

--------------------
Andrew Eisenberg
IBM
4 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA  01886

andrew.eisenberg at us.ibm.com





Torsten Grust <grust at in.tum.de> 
Sent by: talk-bounces at xquery.com
11/06/2005 05:11 PM

To
talk at xquery.com
cc

Subject
[xquery-talk] At risk: Static typing






Dear all,

  I am happy to see the XQuery-related W3C Candidate Recommendations.
That's a significant step and I'm looking forward to see 'Candidate'
prefix go away.

I saw that the CR lists a few features to be at risk (to be removed from
the language specifcation if no implementations exist by the end of the
CR period, most probably sometime in spring 2006).  This list contains
the item 'Static typing'.

I was quite surprised to see this since, from the very first moment I
heard of and worked with XQuery, I felt that static typing is an
integral characteristic of the language.  Even more so since we stared
to implement our own processor for the language.  There were times when
our project literally revolved around type inference and the benefits
you can derive from it.

In this context, my question is: to which extent need I be ''worried''
that static typing will not make it into the Recommendation?

Best wishes,
   --Torsten

P.S.  I understand that the Galx static typing implementation undergoes
a major rewrite.  We're even prepared to help, i.e., tweak our
implementation of static typing such that it counts as an implementation
in the eyes of the formal W3C process. ;-)

-- 
  | Prof. Dr. Torsten Grust                         grust at in.tum.de |
  |                                 http://www-db.in.tum.de/~grust/ |
  |     Database Systems - Technische Universität München (Germany) |
_______________________________________________
talk at xquery.com
http://xquery.com/mailman/listinfo/talk

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://xquery.com/pipermail/talk/attachments/20051106/0a940bcf/attachment.htm