clarification: DFDL behavior of intersect, except operators
Some time back there was an erratum to add intersect and except operators from XPath 2.0 to DFDL. I believe these were in use by the DFDL4S flavor of Daffodil, and so were added to DFDL v1.0. Are these operators restricted to accept or to produce 0 or 1 node only, or are they able to accept and produce lists of nodes that can then be counted with fn:count, for example? I guess I have lost track of the use-cases for these. The XPath 2.0 definition of these operators is of course fully general, accepting multiple node sequences, and producing multiple-node sequences. That would mean the ultimate result of these operators could be a sequence of more than one node, and that means it would have to be an argument to fn:count, fn:exists, .... not sure what other functions. They could never be the direct result-producing part of an expression. Can someone point me at the use case for these again? Mike Beckerle | OGF DFDL Workgroup Co-Chair | Owl Cyber Defense | www.owlcyberdefense.com Please note: Contributions to the DFDL Workgroup's email discussions are subject to the OGF Intellectual Property Policy http://www.ogf.org/About/abt_policies.php
They were added at the same time as dfdl:checkRangeInclusive() anbd
dfdl:checkRangeExclusive() -
https://redmine.ogf.org/projects/dfdl-wg/issues/314.
I know that the functions were intended to replace DFDL4S custom operators
'in' and 'inrange' which were used in assert expressions (see attached
schemas).
I don't recall what the intersect & except operators use cases were
though. I think you need to find the original action in the minutes.
Regards
Steve Hanson
IBM Hybrid Integration, Hursley, UK
Architect, IBM DFDL
Co-Chair, OGF DFDL Working Group
smh@uk.ibm.com
tel:+44-1962-815848
mob:+44-7717-378890
Note: I work Tuesday to Friday
From: Mike Beckerle
participants (2)
-
Mike Beckerle
-
Steve Hanson