- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Aug 2014 17:00:58 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26559 Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mike@saxonica.com --- Comment #1 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- I think the omission of map:size() from the spec is a mistake, though there is prose that says it was a deliberate decision at some point, I'm pretty sure it was reversed; the current XSLT 3.0 draft has the spec as agreed between the WGs. Part of the reason for having different names map:for-each-entry, array:for-each-member was that I think we were keeping options open at the time that the functions might end up in the same namespace. I agree there's less logic to it now. I agree the argument for getting rid of array:get() applies equally to map:get(); the only difference is that different people are involved in the decision, since the map functions are in XSLT 3.0 which has been around for a while and is now at last call. I agree that the need for map:entry is weaker now that we have map:put. On the XSLT side we've been keen that maps should be usable without new syntax, e.g. as an add-on library to XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0, and this creates a requirement for a more complete set of functions than are needed in an XPath 3.1 context - this also affects the need for map:get(). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 12 August 2014 17:01:00 UTC