RE: [xsl] New to XSL - invalid token error

["Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

No, XQuery still differs from true XML in some subtle ways. For example,
it's valid in XQuery to write

<book authorCount=" { count($authors[name="Kay"]) } "/>

(note the nested double quotes).

Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Francis Norton
> Sent: 31 January 2003 23:54
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [xsl] New to XSL - invalid token error
> 
> 
> Well I'll be blowed.
> 
> Michael Kay wrote:
> 
> >Recent drafts of XQuery are closer to real XML syntax. You now write
> >
> >   return <book authorCount="{ count($authors) }"/>
> >
> I'm way out of touch, it's all there on the site. I'm still 
> looking at 
> it. Does it mean that an XQuery statement is essentially a 
> well-formed 
> mixed-content XML fragment? I bet I'm not the only one who's noticed 
> that the sometimes puzzling distinction in XSLT between the 
> root *node* 
> and the root *element* means that XSLT would need no formal 
> changes to 
> accept (multiple root-element) XML Fragments as input instead 
> of (single 
> root-element) XML Documents, if only the underlying parsers 
> would parse 
> them.
> 
> Time for XML 1.1 to treat XML Documents as simply a special 
> case of  XML 
> Fragments, and both to be considered well-formed. One day 
> maybe. Equal 
> rights for fragment types?
> 
> Francis.
> 
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list