- From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 19:27:42 +0200
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
On 5/11/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > One consequence of using variables instead of functions for the state > information ($p:episode and friends) is that they potentially conflict > with the names of options. I have seen that there was a straw poll during the last call which got us 2 for functions against 3 for variables and 1 abstention. I understand the need for making progress, but it looks like we have not reached a consensus on this one. Looking at the arguments on each side: (V) For variables: (1) With some XPath APIs, hooking a function handler is more complex than passing the value of a variable. (F) For functions: (1) Extending XPath with function done more frequently in W3C standards (e.g. XSLT, XForms). (2) Unless the API provides a way to pass a call-back to get the value of a variable, using variable might be less efficient in the cases where there are a number of variables to declare, as a structure with the name and value for each variable will need to be passed. (3) Like Norm noted, there is a potential conflict with pipeline state variables which means we need to create an additional rule to prevent the conflict. My bias: with all the XPath API I used so far (jaxen, Saxon, JAXP), declaring a function or a variable is of equal complexity. So I haven't experimented (V1), and this only leaves me with arguments for functions. Is this all there is? Are there other reasons we want to use variables when others use functions? Alex -- Orbeon Forms - Web 2.0 Forms for the Enterprise http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 17:27:55 UTC