[xquery-talk] xquery 3.1 wishlist
wshager at gmail.com
Fri Jun 26 10:32:45 PDT 2015
That should provide some positive perspectives for integrating with the
web... wait, did I just get off-topic? Oops? No. I write a great deal of
considered. Functions like array:index-of and array:for-each (called map in
many more languages) feel off to me in xquery because of their resemblance
to "imperative" constructs, you may consider converging more towards
I'm not mistaken. As an added advantage it would less surprise programmers
2015-06-26 19:14 GMT+02:00 daniela florescu <dflorescu at me.com>:
> > Which was of course a major failing of the original Xquery proposals.
> > It was staggering that an W3C XML query language should _not_ start from
> > that base. Fortunately It was redrafted to sit over Xpath.
> > XQuery 1 was basically (and should have been defined as) a non-xml
> > syntax for a simplified subset of XSLT.
> BTW, David… it’s funny after 15 years… -)
> If the XSLT WG wanted a simple non-xml syntax for XSLT, they should have
> done it themselves…..why would this
> have been OUR problem !?
> What the XML QUERY Working Group wanted something COMPLETELY different,
> aka, a QUERY LANGUAGE,
> out of which XSLT isn’t one …. that’s all.
> Fun to see that those arguments don’t die even after 15 years :-)
> I remember having those discussion on-line and off-line with James Clark…
> like a decade and a half ago !?? :-)
> Actually, the first running implementation of the integration of XQuery
> and XPath parser was written by me and James
> (both bitching about the “features” in other’s side..:-)
> But overall, I think XSLT and XQuery ended up integrated pretty nicely, so
> it was worth the effort.
> Best regards
> talk at x-query.com
Lagua Web Solutions
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the talk