Lists Home |
Date Index |
Jonathan Robie wrote:
> >It's not as
> >if XPath 2.0 as currently specified can be declared a minimal
> victory; it's
> >completely dependent on the as-of-yet unspecified XQuery type system.
> As yet unspecified? As a member of the XSL WG, surely you have read the
> specification for the type system:
> You are also familiar with the issues, especially structural vs. named
> typing. Are you saying that the type system is not specified
> until we close
> all the issues? Or perhaps you are referring to the fact that we delayed
> publication of the Formal Semantics so that it could track
> developments in
> the XQuery language?
Must you take me so literally? :-) I admit to using hyperbole in my
reference to the large range of significant issues that remain open.