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

RE: XQuery Usecase "PART" incorrect?

From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 17:09:13 +0100
To: "'Probst, Martin'" <martin.probst@sap.com>, <www-ql@w3.org>
Message-ID: <E1CAWBt-0008WN-Ga@frink.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.

Michael Kay 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ql-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ql-request@w3.org] On 
> Behalf Of Probst, Martin
> Sent: 22 September 2004 14:46
> To: www-ql@w3.org
> Subject: XQuery Usecase "PART" incorrect?
> 
> 
> Hello,
> I've stumbled across a little incorrectness in the use cases 
> (I believe). This is from the source of PARTS Q1, line #15:
>     for $p in doc("partlist.xml")//part[empty(@partof)]
>                                         ^^^^^
> Whereas in the main XQuery Specification "empty" stands in 
> the list of reserved function names. So the built-in function 
> "empty" may (or at least should) not be called without using 
> a proper prefix like in the functions and operators spec: 
> "fn:empty()". It's a minor thing but should be corrected in 
> the use cases as it might not be too obvious to users.
> 
> mfg
> Martin Probst
> 
> 
Received on Sunday, 26 September 2004 00:51:27 UTC

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