• To: Joe English <jenglish@f...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• From: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>
• Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 18:26:56 +0100
• In-reply-to: <200305052127.h45LRl906016@d...>
• References: <1ee.8309503.2be828c3@a...><1ee.8309503.2be828c3@a...>

At 14:27 05/05/2003 -0700, Joe English wrote:

> > If the WG can define a conformance level that allows stylesheet authors to
> > write XSLT 2.0 stylesheets without having to worry about W3C XML Schema
> > types, would you still feel the same?
>
>That depends on how it's presented.
>
>If there were one spec defined solely in terms of
>elements, attributes and text, and another built on
>top of that one that added typed data, then sure,
>I'd use the former and simply not bother with the latter.

Which is what (IMO) the wg should have done.
Carved it up such that the db/schema crowd got what they wanted,
without polluting xslt+xpath.
   I'm sure it could have been carved up better, and the good improvements
left in xslt +xpath 2, with the datatypes and other stuff left out for 
xquery to play with
as something built on xpath, not polluting it.

regards daveP

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
    • From: Mike Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...
  • Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XQuery articles on adtmag.com
• Next by Date: Re: XQuery articles on adtmag.com
• Previous by thread: Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• Next by thread: Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread