On 30/03/2026 11:44, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> I note that your function returns xml, whereas Tom's suggestion was for
> a function returning text. I don't think there was any discussion on the
> point.
Indeed, there was no discussion regarding the return type.
My rationale for keeping it as xml was: the output is xml, callers can
immediately use the xml without casting, and nearly all other xml*
functions return xml. Is there a direct advantage of having this
function return text?
Thanks!
Best, Jim
