Re: xpath processing brain dead

On Fri, 2009-02-27 at 22:55 -0500, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> 
> Hannu Krosing wrote:
> >>>   
> >>>       
> >> Some of the functions, including some specified in the standard, produce 
> >> fragments. That's why we have the 'IS DOCUMENT' test.
> >>     
> >
> > But then you could use xmlfragments as the functions return type, no ?
> >
> >   
> >
> 
> Not in the case of xpath, no.

single xml document is a sub-case of xmlforest, so xmlforest should be
allowed as return type, no ?

> There is a very complete standard for the Xpath data model, 
> and we need to adhere to it.

Is declaring a single all-covering "xml" data type the best or even the
only way to adhere ?

> cheers
> 
> andrew
> 
-- 
Hannu Krosing   http://www.2ndQuadrant.com
PostgreSQL Scalability and Availability   Services, Consulting and Training