Subject: Re: [xsl] () equivalent to () ? From: Frans Englich <frans.englich@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:11:06 +0000 |
On Monday 22 August 2005 13:48, Michael Kay wrote: [...] > It's true that the result of data(()) is (). However, systems are allowed > to do static type checking. The static types inferred for () and data(()) > are different. So there's at least one sense in which they are not > equivalent. You mean that the static type of "()" is void(), while for "data()" it is "xdt:anyAtomicType()*"? Could you elaborate? What impact in practice does this difference in static types, whatever it is, have? > > > However, testing this theory in practice in a host language > > such as XSLT 2.0 > > is impossible(?) since all comparison operators returns the > > empty sequence > > when an operand is the empty sequence. > > You're talking about a new comparison operation of your own invention which > you haven't fully defined, and which seems to differ slightly from those > already defined in the language. You're welcome to do this. First you need > to define what you want its semantics to be, and then you can implement it > as a function. But so far, you haven't defined its semantics except by > appeal to "common principles" - which you will quickly find are not as > common as you thought. Right, the question was ill prepared and badly put, there's not much more to say. Cheers, Frans
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] () equivalent to () ?, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] () equivalent to () ?, andrew welch |
Re: [xsl] () equivalent to () ?, andrew welch | Date | Re: [xsl] alphabetic set of xsl:res, David Carlisle |
Month |