[xsl] Re: Re: mapping (Was: Re: Re: . in for)

[Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev at yahoo dot com>]

 Joerg Pietschmann <joerg dot pietschmann at zkb dot ch> wrote: 

[snip]

> 
> The interesting point is now: how could we profit from functional
> programming elements on the XPath level? Your generic sort template
> is probably a good candidate. Most of the generic solutions for
> iterating over a node set are probably covered by other new standard
> stuff, so they're not as convincing as they used to be.
> 

I already provided an answer to this in my previous post.

Another consideration is that in order for all this to be more compact, easy and
elegant, it must be possible to write (in XPath!) expressions like this:

func(someFunc, someOtherFunc, $sequence)

or 

(func(someArguments)) (otherArguments)

In the first case functions are passed as parameters to func().
In the second case, func() returns a function, which is then applied on
otherArguments.

Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list