This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Implementing XPointer Resolution With saxon:evaluate()
Jeni Tennison wrote:
> I guess it is implicit on the site, but I was intending that when you
> have a function signature like:
>
> exsl:node-set(object)
>
> it means that the argument is required and that it's an error if it's
> missing. If it were:
Hmm. That suggests that the Saxon implementation of node-set() is not
conforming as it doesn't throw an exception when no argument is passed.
But I actually think that having "node-set()" return an empty node set
is the better behavior--it's what I would expect from my experience with
other programming languages and it makes it possible to explicitly
create an empty node set.
Cheers,
E.
--
W. Eliot Kimber, eliot@isogen.com
Consultant, ISOGEN International
1016 La Posada Dr., Suite 240
Austin, TX 78752 Phone: 512.656.4139
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list