- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 09:39:40 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9063 Adam Retter <adam@exist-db.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |adam@exist-db.org --- Comment #3 from Adam Retter <adam@exist-db.org> --- Being able to independently compile XQuery modules is something that is incredibly useful in XQuery as it allows you to create systems that operate on Modules for example EXQuery's RestXQ and eXist-db's SOAP Server, both of these allow translation to/from XQuery function calls from a host system or language. If the use-case is that being able to override aspects of a module helps re-use of code through composition, is there not an argument that the granularity of the users modules is not fine enough. i.e. they could just break a module into two modules. I am not opposed to the capability or idea of overriding aspects of modules, as long as we can maintain the capability to independently compile modules somehow. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 6 February 2013 09:39:42 UTC