Subject: Re: [xsl] Decimal precision|
From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2005 05:52:16 +1100
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 17:10:46 -0000, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > So, what is the more direct representation of the empty sequence? > > () > > XPath 2.0 processors are quite likely to give you a warning when you write > "/..", or other "guaranteed empty" path expressions such as @text() or > @foo/@bar. Under strict static typing these are errors - they fall into the > same category as path expressions containing misspelt names such as > doc/chatper. XSLT 2.0 doesn't use strict static typing but processors can > still report warnings for any path expression that's statically known to be > empty. > Yes. I surely know about "()" and the reason I haven't been using it in FXSL was that I wanted the two versions of FXSL (for XSLT 1.0 and XSLT 2.0) to remain as much the same as possible. With the latest additions, though, FXSL for XSLT 2.0 becomes very distinct and different from its predecessor. Therefore, there's not much to keep the same and I'll follow Mike's advice to achieve better performance and to avoid some static type checking warnings. > > > > Would it be interesting to you to be a member of the FXSL > > project team? > > > > It would be interesting, but there aren't enough hours in the day... Mike, you just showed us the opposite. You're doing the best for the project and you *are* de-facto member of the team :o) Thanks for the great advice and for your time. We are proud to have your attention. And thank you for everything you have done through the years -- you've been a great teacher to the whole XSLT community. Cheers, Dimitre.