- From: Liam R. E. Quin <liam@fromoldbooks.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2023 01:02:43 -0400
- To: public-xslt-40@w3.org
On Mon, 2023-04-24 at 17:49 +0100, Norm Tovey-Walsh wrote: > > In PR #449, Mike has applied the changes we requested during review > of > PR #420. I'm sorry that i missed this before. I wonder whether map:pairs() could return not just a loosest-possible record but, in the case of a typed map, a record of the appropriate type? E.g. for a map declared as map(xs:string, xs:double) map:pairs() ought to yield record sof type (xs:string, xs:double). But in 18 i see, A ·key-value pair map· is an instance of the type record(key as xs:anyAtomicType, value as item()*). I'm not sure to what extent it would be useful, either in reducing bugs or in improving optimization - for the latter, the implementation could deduce it anyway, if it was statically known. But either way, no objection. -- 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 Tuesday, 25 April 2023 05:03:10 UTC