[xquery-talk] [ANN] XQuery as a scripting language in IE

COUTHURES Alain alain.couthures at agencexml.com
Fri Mar 27 14:33:05 PST 2009

Thank you again, Michael, for your response.
> Perhaps this should be a project for EXQuery.
Good idea !
> I suspect your chances of getting everyone to accept your design are 
> much better if you have a forum for consultation rather than trying to 
> present it as a fait accompli - even if you do a magnificent job of 
> the design, other people might have different use cases.
Yes, you're right.
> I think there are three possible styles of XML representation:
> (a) one that looks as much as possible like current human-readable 
> XQuery. This is largely a question of changing the rules for escaping 
> of special characters such as the "<" and "<<" operators, and 
> preventing people writing non-XML things like <e att="{<e 
> att="{"3"}"/>}"/> which are currently legal but rather useless.
> (b) one that uses a bit more XML markup, e.g. giving an alternative 
> XML-based syntax for prolog declarations like "import schema" and for 
> function signatures.
> (c) the full (non-human-readable) fine-grained XQueryX syntax.
> Since we already have (c), I think the main requirement is probably 
> for something like (a) (though (b) would give benefits if people want 
> a compromise between human-readability and software-readability).
In my point of view, benefits with (a) would be less than with (b). 
Grammar analysis is much easier with XML markup. I would like XQuery XML 
notation to be at the same level as XSLT.
> One of the challenges is in defining how the in-scope namespaces from 
> the containing XML document should affect the static context of the query.
Thank you also for this remark !


Bordeaux, France
XForms for browsers without plug-in : http://www.agencexml.com/xsltforms
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://x-query.com/pipermail/talk/attachments/20090327/778d2a2c/attachment.htm

More information about the talk mailing list