I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one for whom this language is a means to an end. I think I know what to use it for, I have a mental model of the language and enough curiosity to ask questions when things stray beyond it. I have zero interest in establishing a reputation as an XQuery developer whether by challenging the spec or in any other way but I have a tenacious kind of curiosity that may annoy an author of something I'm asking about. Meh!. XQuery happens to be a good fit for what I am doing at the moment and it bailed me out a couple of days ago when I tried to transform something that was too big for XSLT to swallow. I like it. I'm happy I know enough to get things done and solve my own problems with it. Thus I far have been able to accomplish whatever I needed on my own steam barring yesterdays intervention on grouping by Doc K.
I'm also sure I'm not the only one whose primary interaction with the spec consists of sporadic infrequent googling a phrase zeroing in and zeroing out. If for example something like grouping was vexing me I have a limited threshold for the arcane or the abstruse and I'd be inclined to dump the thing into a relational database and do my aggregating in SQL. Despite owning some XQuery books I'm quite relaxed about being labelled a person who thinks XQuery is a glorified XPath and will happily confess to ignorance of nuances between them. I will tend to extrapolate from what I know about a similar thing and am not and will not be shy about asking about differences along the way. Thats how I augment my mental model of the language and especially when you are using the bleeding edge release it far far better to ask these questions. On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 5:04 PM, W.S. Hager <wsha...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with your critique but xquery != xml. In xquery anything is > sequable, making it a powerful functional language. That the serialization > will sometimes yield minor discrepancies is a known fact programmers deal > with on daily basis. > > Thanks for the enlightening discussion. > > Wouter > Op 8 jan. 2014 17:27 schreef "Ihe Onwuka" <ihe.onw...@gmail.com>: > >> >> On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 4:22 PM, David Carlisle <dav...@nag.co.uk> wrote: >> >>> On 08/01/2014 15:38, Ihe Onwuka wrote: >>> >>>> because it is going to end up (by whatever process) as an attribute >>>> node. >>>> >>> >>> >>> That seems to be the cause of your confusion (and your misreading of the >>> spec and Mike Kay's book) >> >> >> Ok. What sections of Mike Kay's book and the spec didn't I read that >> conveyed the information you just gave and what references to them did I >> miss. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT >> organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance >> affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into your >> Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of AppDynamics >> Pro! >> >> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >> _______________________________________________ >> Exist-open mailing list >> exist-o...@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/exist-open >> >>
_______________________________________________ talk@x-query.com http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
