Re: XML Query Use Case SEQ

Dear Michael,

This is a response to the following message, which you posted to the XML 
Query Working Group's comments list:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-query-comments/2001Mar/0008.html

The XML Query Working Group has approved the following response:

 >XML Query Use Cases
 >W3C Working Draft 15 February 2001
 >
 >1.3 Use Case SEQ:
 >
 >(1)
 >For each query, the Expected Result is embedded in a <result> element.
 >However, none of the Solutions in XQuery construct this element.

True. We'll fix that.

 >(2)
 >In query 4 (1.3.4.4), in the Solution in XQuery,
 >     document("report1")
 >should probably be
 >     document("report1.xml")
 >as in all the other queries.

True. We'll fix that.

 >(3)
 >Again in query 4, in the Solution in XQuery, consider the expression:
 >     EVERY $a IN ... SATISFIES $a AFTER ...
 >XQuery Appendix B says that Quantifiers (SOME/EVERY x IN y SATISFIES z) are
 >at precendence level 6, whereas AFTER (x AFTER y) is at level 7. Thus, the
 >expression should be parsed as
 >     ( EVERY $a IN ... SATISFIES $a ) AFTER ...
 >which is not what you want. (It doesn't even pass type-checking.) Instead,
 >you need to parenthesize the AFTER subexpression:
 >     EVERY $a IN ... SATISFIES ( $a AFTER ... )

Ouch, right again. We should also think about whether this is really the
precedence level we want.

 >(4)
 >Still in query 4, to express "the first Incision",
 >     $proc//incision[1]
 >should probably be changed to
 >     ($proc//incision)[1]
 >as in other queries.  I think they happen to be equivalent for this
 >particular DTD, but you wouldn't want to encourage sloppy thinking.

Sure, that makes sense.

We appreciate your feedback on the XML Query specifications. Please let us 
know if this response is satisfactory. If not, please respond to this 
message, explaining your concerns.

Jonathan Robie
On behalf of the XML Query Working Group

Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2001 12:10:17 UTC