- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 08:03:46 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29141 --- Comment #3 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- Does it make sense (and isn't it too big a change) to allow any sequence as input to copy-of() and snapshot(), where in the case of atomic values, it is simply a no-op? Apart from the signature, I don't think the rules have to change. I think it makes things simpler, i.e. it would help with generic scenarios where input can be anything, and users won't have to write the following, which seems silly: > if($input instance of node()) then copy-of($input) else $input It also helps with making streaming xsl:merge behave more stable and less surprising in the event the xsl:merge-source/@select selects non-nodes or a mix of nodes and atomic values (see bug 29142) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 24 September 2015 08:03:51 UTC