W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ql@w3.org > July to September 2004

Re: Evaluation function

From: Jerome Simeon <simeon@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 13:47:31 -0400
To: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@datadirect.com>
Cc: Stephane Mbaye <stephane.mbaye@gael.fr>, XQuery <www-ql@w3.org>, www-ql-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF18E2B5A6.13574434-ON85256EDA.00619314-85256EDA.0061BB43@us.ibm.com>
There are lots of problems related to how make an eval() function work 

In fact, a better solution to those kinds of issues is support for 
functions in the language, but this is certainly beyond the scope of 
XQuery 1.0

- Jerome

Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@datadirect.com> 
Sent by: www-ql-request@w3.org
07/23/2004 11:25 AM

Stephane Mbaye <stephane.mbaye@gael.fr>
XQuery <www-ql@w3.org>
Re: Evaluation function

Yes, for all practical purposes I suspect the debate is closed for 
XQuery 1.0, unles new information is presented. You can try sending a 
comment to our public comments list (public-qt-comments@w3.org), but I 
doubt that you'll get much traction with this.

XQuery is already a fairly large language for a 1.0 standard, and we 
have no requirement for eval() in our requirements or use case for 
eval() in our use cases. Changing the requirements at this stage is not 
a great idea, we should be closing things down to ship instead.

And every 1.0 standard should leave users with something they can want 
in the 2.0 version...


Stephane Mbaye wrote:

> Thank you for your answers.
> It sounds that an evaluating expression is an interesting issue for many
> users and purposes. I understand, however, how complex it could be to
> specify this function, and in particular with regard to the conversion 
> the dynamic context to the static evaluation context (e.g. should the
> (sub-)expression declare, as "external", the variables to inherit from 
> outer context? Should the current date time be reinitialized? etc.).
> Nevertheless, I am convinced it is not an impossible process and, should 
> evaluate() function be specified, it could have very constraining
> specifications. As an example, it may be totally independent from the
> static/dynamic context of the calling query. It may also have
> implementation-defined or implementation- dependent features such as 
> other components of the XQuery language.
> My concern is at least to have a standardized/common 
> to avoid or minimize the number of different implementations of the same
> thing.
> Is the debate completely closed?
Received on Friday, 23 July 2004 13:48:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:43:43 UTC