This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.
Issue: xqueryx-slash-slash, priority: 3, status: closed says that // can be modelled with the non-abbreviated form /descendant-or-self::node()/ which is fine, butthe examples shown model it as descendant-or-self:: which isn't, in general, equivalent. eg section 3.2 doc("http://bstore1.example.com/bib/bib.xml")//author is converted to doc("http://bstore1.example.com/bib/bib.xml")/descendant-or-self::author rather than doc("http://bstore1.example.com/bib/bib.xml")/descendant-or-self::node()/author As in this case the root of the tree is a document node, and there are no predicates in the step, these two expressions will return the same result but they correspond to different routes through the Xquery grammar, and I believe they should be modelled differently in XqueryX. This doesn't require a change to XqueryX as specified, just a change to the XQueryX version of the examples to use the XML equivalent to /descendant-or-self::node()/author similarly in 3.3 has: doc("http://bstore1.example.com/bib.xml")/descendant-or-self::book David
Your remarks identify places where the document can be improved by correcting some examples. We will undertake these changes editorially. Thank you for your comment.
The XML Query Working Group has considered this comment and agrees to correct the examples in the manner that you described. Please let us know if you agree with this resolution of your issue, by adding a comment to the issue record and changing the Status of the issue to Closed. Or, if you do not agree with this resolution, please add a comment explaining why. If you wish to appeal the WG's decision to the Director, then also change the Status of the record to Reopened. If you wish to record your dissent, but do not wish to appeal the decision to the Director, then change the Status of the record to Closed. If we do not hear from you in the next two weeks, we will assume you agree with the WG decision.
Thanks for agreeing to fix these (sorry I thought I'd replied to this earlier)