- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2007 15:56:23 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=4869 ------- Comment #5 from davidc@nag.co.uk 2007-07-30 15:56 ------- (In reply to comment #4) > The XQueryX from XQTS (1.0.3 dev) is below. I can't quite see how XQueryX > should be used to distinguish the two forms, unless the enclosed element b is > represented as a computed element constructor. Could you please comment? > I don't think there is a "natural" way in xqueryx to encode this. (Just checked the xqueryx.xsl stylesheet for every way that it can be coerced into adding { } around things in the generated xquery text. You could do (the xqueryx equivalent of) <a>{(<b xmlns:p="q"/>)}</a> (that ism throw in an xqx:parenthesizedExpr to "hide" the element constructor but whether or not you consider that a faithful translation of the original <a>{<b xmlns:p="q"/>}</a> I'm not qualified to answer. In that early development of XqueryX I sent many bug reports asking essentially that some notion of equivalence be defined such that one could ask the question (and test) whether an XqueryX expression was equivalent to a given XQuery one, but the decision of the WG was consistently that such a round trip test was not a requirement of XQueryX development.
Received on Monday, 30 July 2007 15:56:58 UTC