W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ql@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: namespace node implementation

From: james anderson <james.anderson@setf.de>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 12:28:58 +0200
To: www-ql@w3.org
Message-Id: <8BBA7428-047A-11D8-A8B0-000393BB8814@setf.de>


On Wednesday, Oct 22, 2003, at 05:22 Europe/Berlin, Per Bothner wrote:

> james anderson wrote:
>
>> the difficulty with an approach which seeks to afford the 
>> prefix-namespace bindings indefinite extent, is that it is hard to 
>> understand how it should operate with situations like
>> ...
>> $E
>> ? (rotatef (first (children (second (children $e))))
>>          (first (children (fourth (children $e)))))
>> NIL
>> ? (push (first (attributes (second (children $e))))
>>       (attributes (fourth (children $e))))
>
> I'm not concerned about modifying nodes in-place, since that isn't 
> possible in XQuery, at least untl somebody defines update semantics 
> for XQuery.

i am. whereby it is better to start with a model which is closed under 
foreseeable operations and which supports a straightforward 
serialization, than to require one which depends on the equivalent of 
futures to model names and which, evidently, leads to numerous 
"patch-up" mechanisms and iterations on serialization algorithms in 
order to get it right. if the leaf values are constants, the model is 
closed, and neither the semantics of graph combination and the 
mechanism for serialization is hard to define.

...
Received on Wednesday, 22 October 2003 06:29:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:17:16 UTC