RE: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometimes too complicated

Subject: RE: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometimes too complicated
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 06:31:59 +0100

> yes it's a bit odd really that the let clause of FLWOR didn't 
> survive into XPath's For expression.

Some people wanted less of the FLWOR expression to make into XPath, some
wanted more. As often happens, the compromise that ended up in the spec was
agreed early on, and never changed because there was never a majority in
favour of any proposal to change it. 

I think it's also an odd omission that XPath has no sorting capability,
though I'm glad the XQuery "order by", with its strange tuple-based
semantics, didn't make it in.

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

Current Thread
Re: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometimes too complicated, (continued) David Carlisle - Mon, 17 Jul 2006 22:36:08 +0100 Wendell Piez - Tue, 18 Jul 2006 10:45:29 -0400 Michael Kay - Tue, 18 Jul 2006 16:45:54 +0100 Wendell Piez - Tue, 18 Jul 2006 12:22:45 -0400 Michael Kay - Sat, 15 Jul 2006 06:31:59 +0100 <= Kamal Bhatt - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:42:04 +1000 Geert Josten - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:23:55 +0200 George Cristian Bina - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:01:24 +0300 Kamal Bhatt - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:01:07 +1000

Current Thread

Re: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometimes too complicated, (continued)
- Kamal Bhatt - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 15:42:04 +1000
  - Geert Josten - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 09:23:55 +0200
- George Cristian Bina - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 10:01:24 +0300
  - Kamal Bhatt - Fri, 14 Jul 2006 17:01:07 +1000

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
RE: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometime, Wendell Piez	Thread	Re: [xsl] A beef with XSLT Sometime, Kamal Bhatt
RE: [xsl] Passing XML Tree to a jav, Michael Kay	Date	Re: [xsl] Re: Keeping a running tot, Andrew Franz
	Month

<-prev [Thread] next->	<-prev [Date] next->
Month Index \| List Home