[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Exactly. Its "worked around" but its not directly supported. In fact many vendor's dont even support arbitrary XDM as parameters (###@!!!@#) .. There's no reason I can think of that should keep the primary input from being any XDM value. ---------------------------------------- David A. Lee dlee@c... http://www.xmlsh.org -----Original Message----- From: Andrew Welch [mailto:andrew.j.welch@g...] Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2012 6:27 AM To: David Lee Cc: liam@w...; xml-dev@l... Subject: Re: what's missing in XML? What's coming? On 3 January 2012 11:15, David Lee <dlee@c...> wrote: > > > The *purpose* of XDM is to be the input to XQuery and XSLT. They are > only defined to operate over XDM instances. I think I must not be > > > > Try sending a sequence, non document node or atomic type as the > primary input to xquery or xslt. > > Not supported, very annoying for languages that as you say whose > purpose is process is processing XDM It's worked around easily enough by using a standalone transform and supplying it as a parameter, or by pulling it in using a combination of unparsed-text(), some wrapper markup and a parse() extension. I think primary input xml might die off as the language evolves. -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] |

Cart



