Well, (a) that's clearly the way the spec is written, and (b) I doubt anyone considered the alternative before, and (c) the alternative is probably acceptable, but is it worth changing? It's worth adding a test case though. Michael Kay > On 11 May 2016, at 09:59, Tim Mills <tim@cbcl.co.uk> wrote: > > Could I please just check that for > > ? ParenthesizedExpr > > It is intentional that atomization happens as > > for $k in KS > return .(fn:data($k)) > > and not > > for $k in fn:data(KS) > return .($k) > > In the former case > > [1, 2, 3]?[1,2] > > is an error, while in the latter case it would return (1, 2). > > Thanks, > Tim >Received on Wednesday, 11 May 2016 09:45:11 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:43:17 UTC