> The docs are pretty clear that the xml:lang affects the language of > the *child text* of elements,
The XML spec says <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml/#sec-lang-tag>: The language specified by xml:lang applies to the element where it is specified (including the values of its attributes) -----------<><< Yes, interesting. However the test cases that were shown are using non-standard functions - i.e. the result of indexes and other vendor specific features (not XPath or XDM or XQuery standards). How ML indexes things and returns results using cts:search() and such is not covered by any specs except ML's. The same is true for all implementations of products that extend a spec. This isn't an excuse - there is obviously inconsistent behavior shown by pre and post deindexing, but the test cases don't really uncover what that is exactly - beyond 'unexpected'. I am not suggesting this is anyone else's responsibility - just making a personal observation on pre-judging exactly 'what' is broken when given a particular test when testing features - If the tests are not testing the documented behavior - its not nearly so easy (for anyone) to judge if the observations are 'correct' or not. The tests in this thread are (to my read) - *neither* test the documented ML vendor specific features against ML docs, nor testing XQuery/XML core features against the W3C docs. So its not easy for either users or developers to make an objective statement about if its 'right' or not -- and if not, what exactly isn't 'right'. That causes debates like this to proliferate instead of getting work done :) .NOTE: ..>> ( This is a general cross industry / cross company/organization statement - and a personal opinion) I bring this up 'preemptively' to help prioritize something as a 'bug' or 'defect' vs 'that would be nice to improve ... someday' If the problem reported doesn't conflict with product specific feature docs or core W3C docs, especially if it doesn't appear to be a common use case - its more likely to be considered a 'feature enhancement request' then a 'bug fix' - and that (feature vs bug) , whether the product open source and written by the love of volunteers, or proprietary and written by paid staff - has a huge impact on if or when it will be considered. If only we all had infinite clones and time and resources :) _______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] Manage your subscription at: http://developer.marklogic.com/mailman/listinfo/general
