W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2007

Re: (ISSUE-40) Builtins and logic functions in BLD

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2007 11:45:35 -0500
To: Dave Reynolds <der@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <5767.1195231535@cs.sunysb.edu>


> 
> Michael Kifer wrote:
> 
> > I made a proposal that we should treat builtins using the same mechanism as
> > modules. For instance, if a builtin is defined in the XQuery/XPath library
> > then we would refer to it as
> > 
> >     fn:dateTime(...)@http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions
> > 
> > where fn is a prefix for http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions
> 
> Isn't the URI enough to avoid clashes?
> 
> What benefit does a module system offer in this case?
> 
> [I realize the benefit of a module system for scoping but for a module 
> consisting of entirely global builtins that doesn't apply. Runtime 
> implementations might use modules to load/unload implementation 
> libraries but that has nothing to do with RIF.]

For builtins the module system is not needed. It was just one way to
indicate that we are dealing with something that is defined by an external
library.  I recall that people did not like the idea of deciding whether
something is a builtin or not based solely on iris.

But, on the other hand, the same builtin may be defined by different
libraries, and the module system may open a way to use different libraries.


	--michael  


> Dave
> -- 
> Hewlett-Packard Limited
> Registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
> Registered No: 690597 England
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 16 November 2007 16:49:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:43 GMT