On 14 Mar 2014, at 11:08, Ihe Onwuka <[email protected]> wrote: > I cannot discern from the specification what the scope of variables > introduced in the operand expression should be.
Same as in any other expression. E.g. if the operand expression is a FLWOR expression, you go to the rules for a FLWOR expression, e.g. the let clause, and the rules for the let clause say The scope of a bound variable includes all subexpressions of the containing FLWOR that appear after the variable binding. [I think we can read "includes" here as "comprises", i.e. it includes nothing other than these subexpressions] Clearly the case clauses of the typeswitch are not subexpressions of this FLWOR so they are not within the scope of a variable introduced by such a let clause. Michael Kay Saxonica > Yes I can to see if > they are but such an experiment would not adjudicate specification > conformance, would it. > > Fleshing it out for clarification (and possible misinterpretation on > my part). Since an operand expression can be FLOWR, are any lets > introduced therein within the scope of the case clauses of the > typeswitch expression? > _______________________________________________ > [email protected] > http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk _______________________________________________ [email protected] http://x-query.com/mailman/listinfo/talk
