- From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Jun 2007 16:43:57 -0400
- To: "Philippe Bonnard" <pbonnard@ilog.fr>
- Cc: "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
> * Could it be possible to limit to functions with an easy > implementation in main language? For example, the match function may be > tricky to implement in a language where there is no libraries concerning > regexp, In my mind, things like regexp processing are so widely used and so widely implemented that to not include them in the core does users a real disservice. > * Up-to-now, I have not the time to check that the selected > functions could be quickly implemented in Java, especially for the date > types. Is it possible to have more time to perform this task? > > * Those functions are perfect to operate against an XML model. I don't see where the XML comes through in these particular functions we're talking about. > However, most of our PR ruleset are not compliant with such a model > since they use methods coming from Java libraries or user's libraries. I > don't think we will be able to bind those methods and data on XML and > XPath functions. Furthermore, even if it exists very similar methods in > the Java library, some of them have a slightly different semantic. Take > for example the '+' operator of Java which differs with 'op:numeric-add' > from the way the overflow is processed. I'm not an expert on this stuff, but my understanding is that the XQuery and XPath Working Groups put quite a bit of work into this, including building many implementations on many platforms. I'd be surprised if there was anything that was particularly hard to implement, unless there was a very good reason for it. If you have specific issues, let me know and I'll try to find out the design rationales behind them. -- Sandro
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 20:44:21 UTC