I agree, we should keep focused on our goal and not get lost in a feature hunt that will always be changing.
As a side note that might help us in the future. The XQTS 3.* [1] supports testing for previous versions of XQuery and XPath. The testing process could be update to use the new catalog and we could just specify XQuery 1.0 for our list of tests. The updated version would allow for a simple switch to see our coverage of XQuery 3.1 vs 1.0. The change would allow for checking selected XQuery 3 features like group by. [1] http://dev.w3.org/2011/QT3-test-suite/ On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 5:49 AM, Jochen Wiedmann <[email protected]> wrote: > 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) >
