On ons, 2011-07-13 at 11:58 +0200, Nicolas Barbier wrote:
> 2011/6/29, Florian Pflug <fgp@phlo.org>:
>
> > Secondly, there is little point in having an type XML if we
> > don't actually ensure that values of that type can only contain
> > well-formed XML.
>
> +1. The fact that XPATH() must return a type that cannot depend on the
> given expression (even if it is a constant string) may be unfortunate,
> but returning XML-that-is-not-quite-XML sounds way worse to me.
The example given was
XPATH('/*/text()', '<root><</root>')
This XPath expression returns a node set, and XML is a serialization
format of a node, so returning xml[] in this particular case seems
entirely reasonable to me.
