RE: [xsl] XPath 2 (and hence XSLT 2) static typing at risk

["Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Just to clarify the situation for XSLT 2.0, the specification does not
actually have any dependency on the formal semantics or on static typing -
essentially because we had neither the resources nor sufficient motivation
to define the static typing rules for XSLT constructs. The specification has
no reference to the formal semantics document (not even a non-normative
reference), so I believe that dropping the FS has no direct impact at all.
There is of course an indirect impact through the XPath 2.0 specification.

The XSLT 2.0 doesn't actually say whether it's required/allowed/prohibited
for "pessimistic static typing" to be used on the XPath expressions in a
stylesheet, but no current implementation attempts this and in my view the
result would be unusable.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liam Quin [mailto:liam@xxxxxx] 
> Sent: 11 March 2009 01:03
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [xsl] XPath 2 (and hence XSLT 2) static typing at risk
> 
> Static typing fans,
> 
> The XPath and XQuery Formal Semantics document, and the 
> pessimistic static typing feature shared by XPath 2, XSLT 2 
> and XQuery, is at risk of being dropped, or at least no 
> longer being normative.
> 
> This is mostly because we don't have resources to do the work.
> (there's also a question of to what extent the type system 
> should be optimistic or poessimistic, but since we don't 
> really have resources to keep it up to date, it's about to be 
> gone-imistic).
> 
> I'm posting because if you are reading this, maybe you are 
> someone who has time and ability to help us out.
> 
> If so, please cantact me.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Liam
> 
> --
> Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, 
> http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ 
> * http://www.fromoldbooks.org/