On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Tim Kimber
<KIMBERT@uk.ibm.com> wrote:
Interesting...I naturally interpreted $x/a/b/$y/../$z
as a series of macro-expansions of the stringified values of the variables
$x, $y and $z. You clearly assumed something different - that $x is a complex-valued
object with a child called 'a'.
I cannot see much value for DFDL in
either interpretation, to be honest. If a path reference can contain variables
then it will not always be possible to work out which parts of the schema
will participate in expression evaluation. The example usage that you gave
{ fn:exists($x[. eq 3] }
could be replaced by { $x eq 3] }.
Are there any other usages that could only be done using a variable in
a path ref?
My proposal would be to allow var refs
within the predicate expression of a StepExpr but not anywhere else in
a StepExpr. Integer variables could then be used to calculate an array
position in a predicate. This would require only a small change to the
grammar, and I think it was probably the intention when this was originally
put into the specification.
regards,
Tim Kimber, DFDL Team,
Hursley, UK
Internet: kimbert@uk.ibm.com
Tel. 01962-816742
Internal tel. 37246742
From:
Mike Beckerle <mbeckerle.dfdl@gmail.com>
To:
dfdl-wg@ogf.org,
Date:
11/09/2012 17:10
Subject:
[DFDL-WG] DFDL
variables as path steps and with predicates
Sent by:
dfdl-wg-bounces@ogf.org
Currently the DFDL spec's grammar productions are quite liberal about where
a VarRef can appear:
PathExpr ::= ("/" RelativePathExpr?)
| RelativePathExpr
RelativePathExpr ::= StepExpr (("/") StepExpr)*
StepExpr ::= FilterExpr | AxisStep
AxisStep ::= (ReverseStep | ForwardStep)
Predicate
FilterExpr ::= PrimaryExpr Predicate
Predicate ::= "[" Expr "]"
PrimaryExpr ::= Literal | VarRef
|
ParenthesizedExp
in terms of XPath 2.0 syntax, you could write $x/a/b/$y/../$z.
However, the spec also says the type of a variable can only be one of the
simple types allowed by DFDL only. So no path steps in the sense
of children are meaningful after a DFDL variable. Furthermore, variables
are all declared at top level. There is no notion of parent nodes for variable
values; hence, a/$x is meaningless (or means the same as $x by itself),
and $x/.. is similarly meaningless.
But, a variable reference can be followed by a predicate. The resulting
node set, would either be one node, containing the value of the variable,
or zero nodes.
For example is { fn:exists($x[. eq 3] } is presumably a boolean
valued expression true if variable x's value is 3.
Are there any issues here with predicates??
Should we update the expression language productions to enable only sensible
use of DFDL variables in expressions or leave it to match XPath 2.0's more
general syntax.
If we update the productions should we disallow predicates after variable
references also? This loses no expressive power, you can still write {
if ($x eq 3) then true else false }, which is to say I think there is no
inherent capability lost if we require variable references to be atomic
expressions that produce exactly a single node value.
...mikeb
--
Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL WG Co-Chair
Tel: 781-330-0412
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
--
dfdl-wg mailing list
dfdl-wg@ogf.org
https://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/dfdl-wg