Re: [xsl] Want to process XHTML in my XSL stylesheets.

[David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>]

Mike Kay wrote
> but my suspicion is that in most cases the
> only type you can deduce for the result tree is "document".

I strongly agree (and just said the same to Jonathan Robie on XML-dev)
but given that, is there any point in having XPath2 weighed down with
all this static typing machinery? It can be moved to Xquery-only without
affecting Xquery. Removing that would go some way to restoring usability
to Xpath2. Making static typing Xquery-only doesn't do anything to give
usability to Xquery, but I've come to the conclusion that Xquery is
really just for querying databases, ie extracting relatively small simple
chunks from very large data sets, where preoccupation with typing at the
expense of usable methods for navigating round a document tree are
perhaps more reasonable.

David

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list