[xquery-talk] xquery 3.1 wishlist

[W.S. Hager]

I meant *the lack of* array:index-of(), obviously.

2015-06-26 19:32 GMT+02:00 W.S. Hager <wshager at gmail.com>:

> That should provide some positive perspectives for integrating with the
> web... wait, did I just get off-topic? Oops? No. I write a great deal of
> javascript, and this is actually why I would like my wishlist to be
> considered. Functions like array:index-of and array:for-each (called map in
> many more languages) feel off to me in xquery because of their resemblance
> to javascript, but with slightly different semantics. Since this pertains
> to "imperative" constructs, you may consider converging more towards
> javascript, which was the reason for the 3.1 spec in the first place, if
> I'm not mistaken. As an added advantage it would less surprise programmers
> coming from javascript, I think.
>
> 2015-06-26 19:14 GMT+02:00 daniela florescu <dflorescu at me.com>:
>
>> >
>> >
>> > Which was of course a major failing of the original Xquery proposals.
>> > It was staggering that an W3C XML query language should _not_ start from
>> > that base.  Fortunately It was redrafted to sit over Xpath.
>> > XQuery 1 was basically (and should have been defined as) a non-xml
>> > syntax for a simplified subset of XSLT.
>>
>> BTW, David… it’s funny after 15 years… -)
>>
>> If the XSLT WG wanted a simple non-xml syntax for XSLT, they should have
>> done it themselves…..why would this
>> have been OUR problem !?
>>
>> What the XML QUERY Working Group wanted something COMPLETELY different,
>> aka, a QUERY LANGUAGE,
>> out of which XSLT isn’t one …. that’s all.
>>
>> Fun  to see that those arguments don’t die even after 15 years :-)
>>
>> I remember having those discussion on-line and off-line with James Clark…
>> like a decade and a half ago !?? :-)
>>
>> Actually, the first running implementation of the integration of XQuery
>> and XPath parser was written by me and James
>> (both bitching about the “features” in other’s side..:-)
>>
>> But overall, I think XSLT and XQuery ended up integrated pretty nicely,
>> so it was worth the effort.
>>
>> Best regards
>> Dana
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> talk at x-query.com
>> http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> W.S. Hager
> Lagua Web Solutions
> http://lagua.nl
>



-- 

W.S. Hager
Lagua Web Solutions
http://lagua.nl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://x-query.com/pipermail/talk/attachments/20150626/275a1b89/attachment.html>