Prestons example suggests, that in that particular case it is possible
to be compliant with 3.1 ("optional second parameter"), while
upholding upwards compatibility to 1.0.Or, in other words: We can have both. (In that particular case.) In less obvious cases, one might introduce a configuration parameter like "xquery_spec_level" with a default value of "1.0". In general, I wouldn't want to block further development in any direction. Although I agree with Till, that reaching older targets should have priority over new targets. Otherwise, we'd basically play hare and hedgehog with a moving target. Or, in other words: We'd be the hare that cannot catch the hedgehog. Jochen On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Till Westmann <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > right now I’d prefer to focus on getting further along on the path to XQuery > 1.0 compliance. > There’s still quite some work between us and XQuery 1.0. And XQuery 3.0 and > 3.1 contain a significant number of new features (both in the data model and > in the language). > I think that it’d be better to strive for 1.0 compliance with a few > 3.0/3.1-based extensions (the group-by cause comes to mind) than to aim at > 3.1 immediately. > > My 2c, > Till > >> On Feb 23, 2015, at 4:37 PM, Eldon Carman <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> What do you think about targeting for XQuery 3.1 specification instead of >> 1.0? >> >> Recently, I was debugging the round function for XQuery decimal values. As >> a result I found that round function in 3.1 allows an optional second >> parameter to specify precision. While many functions remain the same, a few >> have new parameters. >> >> The XQuery Test Suite for 3.* specifications has updated the previous tests >> and add new ones to cover the new features. The new test suite has ~26,000 >> tests. I create an issue to support the new XQTS 3.* catalog [1]. While >> supporting the new testing suite is step one, I was curious to see what >> everyone though about supporting XQuery 3.1 vs XQuery 1.0. What do you see >> as the pros and cons? >> >> Thanks >> Preston >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VXQUERY-137 > -- Any world that can produce the Taj Mahal, William Shakespeare, and Stripe toothpaste can't be all bad. (C.R. MacNamara, One Two Three)
