RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.1: Nestable sequences or sequence references?

Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.1: Nestable sequences or sequence references?
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2008 10:05:59 -0000
I think there are quite a few people who recognize that there's a need for
richer data structures in XDM, but there are different views about how
important such features are, and about exactly what features should be
provided to meet the requirement. (The cited bugzilla entry, you will
notice, is marked "closed, won't fix", but that doesn't mean that all
progress in this general area is ruled out.) Ideas include

(a) nested sequences

(b) references (an item can be a reference to a node or any other value)

(c) tuples whose fields are known and named at compile-time

(d) maps whose keys are known only at run-time

(e) higher-order functions (which would enable any of the above to be
constructed, though perhaps not with elegant syntax)

By all means add your own input to the WGs; it's harder to dismiss a
requirement if there's evidence of widespread support for it. Practical use
cases of things you can't do (easily or efficiently) today are always the
most persuasive argument.

Michael Kay 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Florent Georges [mailto:lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx] 
> Sent: 08 December 2008 01:05
> To: XSL Mulberry list
> Subject: [xsl] XSLT 2.1: Nestable sequences or sequence references?
>   Hi,
>   I've digged a bit into the W3C bugzilla, but didn't find 
> anything.  Is there any plan to introduce some kind of 
> nestable sequences or sequence references in XPath or XSLT 2.1?
>   By nestable sequence, I mean a kind of sequence that is not 
> automatically atomized.  For instance:
>     sref:make-sref((1, 2)), sref:make-sref((3, 4))
> would be (pseudo-code):
>     ( (1, 2) (3, 4) )
> that is, a sequence of two sequences (of each two integers.)
>   Regards,
> --
> Florent Georges

Current Thread