- From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:14:04 +0100
- To: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Cc: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>, Toman_Vojtech@emc.com, public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 8:44 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote: > I think a better guide would be that any process that returns an atomic > value (eg string, number) should be an XPath function; any process that > returns XML should be an XProc step. this could be made to be true (and I like the characterization); but this is not saying much as the difference between a string, number and xml could just be an interceding c:result root element. I think the less xproc ordained functions the better ... I would propose leaving it to future versions to figure out. my 2 koruna. cheers, Jim Fuller
Received on Sunday, 7 December 2008 15:14:43 UTC