> (a) the $doc/id(@x) approach isn't obvious to the average beginner neither is xmlns=anything, but it doesn't stop us using it:-) > I'm not personally overwhelmed by the weight of these arguments but I can > live with them. Yes there are a great many things in XPath2 that are more horrible than this small duplication of functionality. But actually what is the semantics of the second argument? Does it have to be a single document node, or is there some implicit application of union and root() invoked as would be the case if id($a,$b) were defined to be $b/id($a). I have a horrible feeling that you are going to tell me it's a type error to have anything other than a single document. David ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________Received on Wednesday, 24 March 2004 12:17:51 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:07 GMT