Proposed extensions to unary and binary lookup expressions #3
Conversation
Allows certain common constructs (string literals and variable references) to appear on the RHS of the lookup operator "?" without parentheses
|
A clear +1 from my side! We noticed as well that it can be painful to explain the difference between |
|
+1 from me too. Looks good. Unless I see any objections within a month, I think we can safely merge this. People can always file issues later, after all, these are only proposals at this stage. @rhdunn Any comments? |
|
+1 from me as well No comments at this stage. |
|
Should this also add QName and URIQualifiedName to the list of unparenthesized items? This way, NCName can be replaced by EQName. This would allow: |
|
The main purpose of the lookup construct is for easy addressing into JSON structures, and QName-valued keys don't arise in JSON, so I think not. |
Allows certain common constructs (string literals and variable
references) to appear on the RHS of the lookup operator "?" without
parentheses