Subject: [xsl] The Perils of Sudden Type-Safety in XPath 2.0|
From: Gunther Schadow <gunther@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 12:35:55 -0500
Hi, I am upgrading my stuff to Saxon 7.4 and I am biting my behind now that I even started this (one day before a demo!!!).
Apparently now everything wants to be type safe and type rules are being enforced according to XPath 2.0.
I do see the point for type safety in languages that never did anything else, like Java. But I think suddenly making XPath 2.0 into a strongly typed language was a BAD, BAD, BAD idea!
This suddenly breaks a lot of existing XSLT code and even breaks implementations that try to comply (such a Saxon) in aread that where hitherto never a problem. I now get Saxon right out crashing from ClassCastExceptions and stuff.
Please, please, can't this decision for XPath not turned around? Could strong typing not be made optional? Why should one go through the hassle of adding explicit type conversions if they do nothing else than making the hitherto conveniently implicit conversions explicit. What's the point of this?
Also what I don't like is that this now makes me drag reference to W3C XML-Schema into my transforms everywhere just so I can use the xs:integer() conversion, when I have no business with W3C schema otherwise?
I am quite taken aback by this. -Gunther
-- Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D. gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Medical Information Scientist Regenstrief Institute for Health Care Adjunct Assistant Professor Indiana University School of Medicine tel:1(317)630-7960 http://aurora.regenstrief.org