Re: Reference and First-Class Function

> > xslt spec suggests to consider extension object as atomic value:
> 
> > 18.1.3 External Objects
> > An implementation may allow an extension function to return an object
> > that does not have any natural representation in the XDM data model,
> > either as an atomic value or as a node.
> 
>   That's maybe because of my bad English, but I would have said the
> text you quoted says instead that "an extension function can return
> an object that is neither an atomic type nor a node," which seems to
> be exactly what we have here.
> 
>   Did I misunderstand something?

Must be you're right.

I think, however, that that sentence is not perfect, as it may be treated 
differently. 

At first reading I've thought that "either as an atomic value or as a node" 
relates to the "object".

"An implementation may allow an extension function to return an object
... 
either as an atomic value or as a node."
--
Vladimir Nesterovsky
http://www.nesterovsky-bros.com