Subject: Re: [xsl] XQuery (was Designs for XSLT functions) From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2001 09:21:18 +0000 |
Evan Lenz wrote: > > The question in my mind is: should the W3C recommend two different languages > which provide "broadly equivalent functionality"? And they're not just > equivalent, but they have almost indistinguishable data models and > processing models. And I think once they come up with an XML syntax, it will > be even harder to look at XQuery with a straight face, with XSLT 1.0 having > been published for well over a year. > > What's more is that it seems that the XPath 2.0 and XSLT 2.0 requirements > are trying to fill the gap with regard to whatever slight differences there > currently are between XSLT and XQuery. > > My simplistic analysis is that > > XQuery = XSLT - templateRules - nonAbbreviatedXPathAxes ... > And I was hurt by the distinction between "a human-readable query syntax and > an XML-based query syntax". But it would allow someone to prove a point by providing a mapping from the "human-readable query syntax" to XSLT as "an XML-based query syntax", no? Francis. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] XQuery (was Designs for XSLT , Evan Lenz | Thread | Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Uche Ogbuji |
Re: [xsl] Newbie needs xsl, Jeni Tennison | Date | Re: [xsl] thanks, also thoughts on , Jeni Tennison |
Month |