;) What about adding a .tmp extension to temporarily inactive files?
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Andy Bunce <bunce.a...@gmail.com> wrote: > I hesitate to suggest this given the recent thread about xquery file > extensions :-), but an alternative solution to this might be to expose the > extensions used for by restxq scan as a config option. I guess this > currently is *.xqm *.xq. If I could set this to, for example, *.xqa, for > "xquery active" or "xquery annotated", then the problem would go away. > > /Andy > > > > > On 16 June 2014 16:21, Andy Bunce <bunce.a...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >Did you already try to move all non-restxq modules into the repository? >> I am sure that works but it does not seem the right use of the repository >> to me, particularly if those modules start to reference other non xqm files. >> >> /Andy >> >> >> On 16 June 2014 16:07, Christian Grün <christian.gr...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> > My motivation is to find a restxq config that avoids the "parsing tax". >>> >>> Did you already try to move all non-restxq modules into the >>> repository? That's what we usually do. >>> >>> Pre-compilation will fix various of the problems, too (but this is >>> still on our list, and non-trivial..). >>> >>> Christian >>> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Andy Bunce <bunce.a...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > Thanks, I will give it a go. >>> > My motivation is to find a restxq config that avoids the "parsing tax". >>> > I am >>> > thinking of trying setting RESTXQPATH to restxq. >>> > Then using this structure: >>> > webapp >>> > -app1 >>> > --mod2.xqm >>> > >>> > -restxq >>> > --app1 >>> > ---restmod1.xqm >>> > >>> > -static >>> > --app1 >>> > ---index.html >>> > >>> > Where restxq/app/restmod1.xqm etc all have declare base-uri >>> > "../../app"; >>> > >>> > Unless there is another imminent solution to this in the works :-)? >>> > >>> > /Andy >>> > >>> > >>> > On 16 June 2014 14:14, Christian Grün <christian.gr...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi Andy, >>> >> >>> >> I agree that relative base-uri declarations should always refer to the >>> >> location of the current query file, no matter in which context. This >>> >> should be fixed in the latest snapshot [1]. >>> >> >>> >> Thanks, >>> >> Christian >>> >> >>> >> >>> >> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Andy Bunce <bunce.a...@gmail.com> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Hi, >>> >> > It seems that in restxq mode relative paths for declare base-uri are >>> >> > resolved differently [1]. If I have >>> >> > >>> >> > -webapp >>> >> > --folder1 >>> >> > ---mod1.xqm (which has import module namespace xm='test' at >>> >> > 'mod2.xqm';) >>> >> > ---mod2.xqm >>> >> > The import works. If I add >>> >> > declare base-uri "."; >>> >> > to mod1. the import fails, running the same code not via restxq and >>> >> > it >>> >> > works. >>> >> > Is this intended behavior? >>> >> > /Andy >>> >> > >>> >> > [1] >>> >> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-xquery-30-20140408/#id-base-uri-decl >>> > >>> > >> >> >
