- From: Josh Spiegel <josh.spiegel@oracle.com>
- Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2015 10:51:14 -0800 (PST)
- To: Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
- Cc: Public Joint XSLT XQuery XPath <public-xsl-query@w3.org>
> On Nov 4, 2015, at 12:48 AM, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote: > > We need to be very careful when we say that "the context item static type is absent” as to whether this means “there will be no context item”, or “we have no information about the type of the context item”. I didn’t assume it could mean the latter. My understanding is that a type is absent in cases where there can be no value. But, if we assume that absent means “no information”, what is the difference be between “absent" and "item()”? > When we say this in connection with function bodies, we mean “there will be no context item”. When we say it at the top level of the query, we mean “we have no information”. I don’t agree with this. I think in both cases absent should mean the same thing. The default initial value for the context item static type is item() http://www.w3.org/TR/xquery-30/#id-xq-static-context-components I suppose an implementation could override the value to be absent but I don’t see why this should change the meaning of an absent type. Thanks, Josh
Received on Wednesday, 4 November 2015 18:52:17 UTC