[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jonathan Robie wrote:
>
> But the XML syntax for element constructors is not at all confusing unless
> the query is embedded in an XML document. Many users seem to find it quite
> intuitive, and it makes it possible to copy the text of a document and add
> query expressions for dynamic content.
>
> So I think that there are good reasons to keep it.
>
FWIW, I say (in this order)
1) get it out the door as soon as it works.
2) introduce update as soon as possible.
One can always introduce a new/XML syntax, I would favor:
3) updating XSLT including XPath 2.0 as the XML syntax 'version' of XQuery,
that is to say any features of XQuery not included in XPath 2.0 should be
included in XSLT 2.0 (well it already has element constructors etc). Is this
feasable?
Jonathan
|
