Re: justify or remove aliases: base-uri, resolve-uri

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jeni Tennison writes:

> On 15 Sep 2008, at 09:54, Henry S. Thompson wrote:
>> Dan Connolly writes:
>>
>>> Whether they are aliases of XPath 1.0 or XPath 2.0 functions
>>> makes no difference; they're still aliases.
>>
>> I think perhaps you misunderstood.  There _is no_ XPath 1.0 function
>> which has the relevant behaviour.  So we have defined an extension
>> function _for XPath 1.0_ whose functionality is defined to be the
>> XPath 1.0 equivalent of an XPath 2.0 function.
>
>
> Perhaps Dan's point is that we should use the XPath 2.0 function
> namespace (http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions) for those functions
> rather than co-opting them into our own namespace.

I thought of that, but that's sort of wrong, isn't it?  The function
we want is not actually/exactly the function whose name is
http://www.w3.org/2005/xpath-functions:base-uri, because that is a
function defined

  a) with input a node in an XPath 2 data model
 and
  b) value an xs:anyURI or NULL

whereas the function we are defining has 

  a) input an infoitem
 and
  b) output a string.

ht
- -- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
                         Half-time member of W3C Team
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIzmlakjnJixAXWBoRAmLyAJwP/vTQX2vnUSYJ18O7QuW0N/6krwCbBK7g
j+9OSL4HvAkiiE/mTuG1jd8=
=kDfu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Received on Monday, 15 September 2008 13:56:27 UTC