Subject: Re: [xsl] Type of a variable containing values of mixed types From: "Justin Johansson procode@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 13:24:37 -0000 |
This question has been on my TODO list to ask the folks at MulberryTech XSL List for quite some time. I think this came about in XPath DM 3.0 regarding xs:numeric as per spec ref: http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-datamodel-3/#types-hierarchy In the type hierachy xs:numeric now appears for the first time spec-wise (I believe) and it's on the right-hand side under "union types". Mathematically this seems inconsistent with respect to xs:anyAtomicType given that it as a diagrammed type itself appears on the left-hand side of the type hierarchy diagram and so does not identify itself as a union type. But surely xs:anyAtomicType is in fact a union type (set-theoretically/type-theoretically speaking). So with respect to "union/non-union" reasoning which is correct xs:anyAtomicType or xs:numeric as far as the diagram goes? Or, rephasing, why is xs:numeric treated somehow differently to xs:anyAtomicType? On the other hand, perhaps this is all to do with some practical reason for injecting xs:numeric into the XPath DM 3.0 type hierarchy as a union type so as not to disaffect the status quo? Any thoughts/insight from XSL List community? Justin Johansson Twitter: ** b*@MartianOdyssey* <https://twitter.com/MartianOdyssey> : Project Clockwork: My invention of the fastest and most extensible XPath engine for the JVM (or so I aspire to).
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Type of a variable contai, Martin Honnen martin | Thread | Re: [xsl] Type of a variable contai, Dimitre Novatchev dn |
Re: [xsl] Type of a variable contai, Michael Kay mike@xxx | Date | Re: [xsl] Type of a variable contai, Dimitre Novatchev dn |
Month |