- From: Kay, Michael <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Date: Wed, 22 May 2002 20:18:00 +0200
- To: Evan Lenz <evan@evanlenz.net>, "Kay, Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Cc: David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk>, public-qt-comments@w3.org
> If we remove the "full" for from XPath, then I agree that let > would be > needed. I don't want to give up the ability to access > intermediate context > nodes (as opposed to being restricted to the ends of the > spectrum, i.e. . > and current()). Yes. The strongest use case for adding LET is that it would allow you to bind to the context node at each level of predicate nesting: chapter[let $c := @id return section [starts-with(@id,$c)]] I don't like the syntax: it would be much nicer to write chapter[$c; section [starts-with(@id,$c/@id)]] but at least it gives the functionality. Michael Kay
Received on Wednesday, 22 May 2002 14:18:09 UTC