https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=29622 --- Comment #3 from Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> --- (In reply to Jonathan Robie from comment #2) > I assume you want this for both maps and arrays. If I understand this > correctly, it would allow sequences of keys in either case: No, I don't think that's an accurate description of the proposed change. (1) array:get($K) and map:get($K), as well as $A($K) and $M($K), all still require $K to be a single atomic value. (2) the lookup operator $A?$K and $M?$K already allows $K to be a sequence of atomic values. What is changed is that in a lookup operator, $K is atomized as a whole, rather than being atomized item-by-item. This brings it into line with all other operations that expect a sequence of atomic values as an argument. For example, suppose that @IDREFS is an attribute node of type xs:IDREFS with value "A B C D" -- that is, its typed value is ("A", "B", "C", "D"). And consider $M, a map {"A":1, "B":2, "E":5} Under the current rules, $M?(@IDREFS) is an error because it translates to map:get($M, ("A", "B", "C", "D")) Under the proposed rules, the same expression returns (1, 2), because it translates to ("A", "B", "C", "D") ! map:get($M, .) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2016 19:24:40 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:58:00 UTC