sorry, I was confused by what you were saying earlier, and thought
surely he can't be saying THAT! basically from coming in in the middle
of the thread, reading something that made me think: by god, the good
Doctor has been possessed of the Devil!

I suppose I should have thought it through first, but I was on my
fifth cup of coffee, and suffering from a bad day of debugging code
that worked the day before.

Cheers,
Bryan Rasmussen


On Tue, Mar 4, 2008 at 10:31 PM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Not sure what point you're making
>
>
>  >
>  > sure but it also makes sense to say child::sub
>
>  of course, and you can.
>
> >
>  > I don't think most doc-heads would accept as valid the idea
>  > that a mixed content element (especially if the element has
>  > the mixed content in it) is of type string.
>  >
>  of course, and it isn't of type string. But if you atomize it you get an
>  untypedAtomic value which can be used anywhere you might use a string.
>
>
>  Michael Kay
>  http://www.saxonica.