W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ql@w3.org > July to September 2004

AW: XQuery Usecase "PART" incorrect?

From: Probst, Martin <martin.probst@sap.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 13:35:29 +0200
Message-ID: <324B119BAD4D8F42AA66C7E44508DACC2008E3@dewdfe20.wdf.sap.corp>
To: "'Michael Kay'" <mhk@mhk.me.uk>, www-ql@w3.org

> You are right that there's an inconsistency in saying the function name
> empty() is reserved, and then using it for a standard function, but the fix
> you propose isn't the right one. The correct fix is that empty() should only
> be reserved if it has no arguments.

Well, in that case you would further complicate the lexing of XQueries. Also this would lead to inconsistencies, text(), node(), comment() and empty() would be recognized like that, element(), document-node() etc. not. If the user is required to use the prefix on e.g. element() (empty and not empty!) anyways, why not keep it consistent and disallow empty() without a prefix too?
I think it would be more user friendly to say "all node test function names are reserved if not used with prefix" than "some node test ...", wouldn't it?

mfg
Martin Probst
Received on Friday, 24 September 2004 11:36:13 UTC

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