- From: Kay, Michael <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2001 10:36:42 +0100
- To: "'Dimitre Novatchev'" <dnovatchev@yahoo.com>, "Kay, Michael" <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>, xsl-editors@w3.org, w3c-xsl-wg@w3.org
> Let's call things with their proper names -- you're talking > here about a particular case of functional composition. > > By now, it should have become quite clear, that support for > higher-order functions > in XPath 2.0 and XSLT 2.0 is the logical and necessary > foundation for this and other similar proposed extensions. > The proposed data model for XQuery 1.0 and XPath 2.0 (and therefore for XSLT 2.0) is published at [1]. Currently, this model does not include functions as objects that can be manipulated within the type system, which means that functions cannot take functions as arguments or produce functions as their results. If you want to argue the case for higher-order functions, I would suggest you do it in the form of a comment on the published data model, which should be addressed to www-xml-query-comments@w3.org It would be best to put together the argument as a free-standing document that doesn't rely on previous correspondence, remembering that half the audience are more interested in XQuery than in XSLT. The joint XPath task force has previously decided against including higher-order functions and may well feel that this is too big a change to make at this stage. This is partly because we already have enough of a challenge sorting out the precise semantics of the type system without this extra complication. However, if you put forward the case I'm sure it will be considered on its merits. Mike Kay [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/query-datamodel/
Received on Monday, 19 November 2001 04:36:54 UTC