- From: Kay, Michael <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2002 18:59:10 +0200
- To: Svgdeveloper@aol.com, public-qt-comments@w3.org
> The description in 2.2 of the xf:collection function is > confusing, to me at > least. > > A collection is said to be any sequence of nodes but a > sequence is defined > elsewhere as a collection of both nodes and atomic values. > So, by that latter > definition it isn't that kind of sequence at all. Clearly, a sequence that contains nodes only is a special case of a sequence that can contain both nodes and atomic values. So yes, it is that kind of sequence. > > Also it doesn't seem helpful to define a collection by using > a term which is itself defined in terms of an (ordered) collection. Well, we're not actually defining the term "collection" here, only the behavior of a function named "collection". > > A similar lack of clarity/consistency seems to afflict 14.5.4 > in Functions and Operators. > There's a narrow line between abstraction and lack of clarity. The definition of the collection function is deliberately abstract, in that the concept of a collection identified by a URI may have many different concrete realizations in different implementations. In some implementations it might be something like a WebDAV collection, or a region of a database; in others it might be a directory or folder in filestore, or the set of documents listed in some XML index document. We don't want to rule any of these things out. Michael Kay
Received on Friday, 25 October 2002 12:59:21 UTC