- From: Liam R. E. Quin <liam@fromoldbooks.org>
- Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2020 13:01:47 -0500
- To: public-xslt-40@w3.org
On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 18:27 +0100, Christian GrĂ¼n wrote: > How do people feel about the third fn:filter argument that I proposed > in this thread? It starts to feel to me as if a syntactic construct would be more in keeping: for $matthew in slice of $mark from position = 1 to $john where . mod 2 return $matthew * $luke Overall i'm fine with {...} representing a block of code (as in Perl, just as i first encounered a slice operator ("..") in Perl) but something simple seems to be becoming very complex. XPath is used standalone, with XQuery and with XSLT, and the target audiences overlap only slightly i think. A simpler rule might be that you can always supply *either* positional arguments *or* named arguments, replace(input: ., regex: $pattern, collation: $speaker, $replace- code: { $2 || $1 }) However, this would require making sure all the functions in F&O had sensible parameter names instead of item1 and item2 or whatever, as they'd enter the API. Supplying options in a map might be done with something like, replace(arguments : $map) where arguments would be a reserved word. -- Liam Quin, https://www.delightfulcomputing.com/ Available for XML/Document/Information Architecture/XSLT/ XSL/XQuery/Web/Text Processing/A11Y training, work & consulting. Barefoot Web-slave, antique illustrations: http://www.fromoldbooks.org
Received on Friday, 4 December 2020 18:02:21 UTC