Hi,
I wonder why it is possible to create instances of xdt:anyAtomicType. Saxon
evaluates the expression "('foo' cast as xdt:anyAtomicType) instance of
xdt:anyAtomicType" as true.
From my perspective, when taking the recent "[xsl] What's the difference
between xdt:anyAtomicType and xs:anySimpleType?" thread into account, the
xdt:anyAtomicType should be abstract since its "role" is to group atomic
types(not include composite simple types), and that xdt:untypedAtomic should
be used for instantiating values of unknown or "arbitrary" type.
I wonder:
* Why is xdt:anyAtomicType not an abstract type? Why wouldn't it make sense to
make it abstract?
* In what circumstances is it useful to have values of type xdt:anyAtomicType?
For example, XSL-T 2.0 defines it as one of the available builtin types, but
doesn't refer to it otherwise(AFAICT).
If it was arranged such that xdt:untypedAtomic didn't exist and hence no type
promotion from xdt:untypedAtomic existed, and that xdt:anyAtomicType was the
type for untyped data which via the "17.4 Casting within a branch of the type
hierarchy" became appropriate types, the scenario would look
differently(IMHO, AFAICT). And that's also a question, why is it arranged
such that type promotion from xdt:untypedAtomic is used instead of
down-casting from xdt:anyAtomicType?
Pointers to available(as in beer, unfortunately) documentation is appreciated.
Cheers,
Frans
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--