> > > Which was of course a major failing of the original Xquery proposals. > It was staggering that an W3C XML query language should _not_ start from > that base. Fortunately It was redrafted to sit over Xpath. > XQuery 1 was basically (and should have been defined as) a non-xml > syntax for a simplified subset of XSLT.
BTW, David… it’s funny after 15 years… -) If the XSLT WG wanted a simple non-xml syntax for XSLT, they should have done it themselves…..why would this have been OUR problem !? What the XML QUERY Working Group wanted something COMPLETELY different, aka, a QUERY LANGUAGE, out of which XSLT isn’t one …. that’s all. Fun to see that those arguments don’t die even after 15 years :-) I remember having those discussion on-line and off-line with James Clark… like a decade and a half ago !?? :-) Actually, the first running implementation of the integration of XQuery and XPath parser was written by me and James (both bitching about the “features” in other’s side..:-) But overall, I think XSLT and XQuery ended up integrated pretty nicely, so it was worth the effort. Best regards Dana _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
