On Mon, 2009-03-02 at 15:25 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Hannu Krosing wrote: > > Is it just that in you _can't_ use Xpath on fragments, and you _need_ to > > pass full documents to Xpath ? > > > > At least this is my reading of Xpath standard. > > It is easy to read the XPath standard that way, because the concept of > fragments is not defined outside of SQL/XML, and is therefore unknown to > the XPath standard.
How is the opposite - Does SQL/XML specify Xpath usage for XML(SEQUENCE) and XML(CONTENT) ? > The question at hand is rather whether we can > usefully adapt it. This sounds like trying to adapt integer arithmetic to lists-of-integers. Even for simple things like addition, there are several ways of doing it [1,2,3] + [1,1,1] = [1,2,3,1,1,1] [1,2,3] + [1,1,1] = [2,3,4] [1,2,3] + [1,1,1] = [[1,2,3],[1,1,1]] all seem possible and "logical" -- Hannu Krosing http://www.2ndQuadrant.com PostgreSQL Scalability and Availability Services, Consulting and Training -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers