Did you already try to move all non-restxq modules into the repository?
I am sure that works but it does not seem the right use of the repository to me, particularly if those modules start to reference other non xqm files.
/Andy
On 16 June 2014 16:07, Christian Grün christian.gruen@gmail.com wrote:
My motivation is to find a restxq config that avoids the "parsing tax".
Did you already try to move all non-restxq modules into the repository? That's what we usually do.
Pre-compilation will fix various of the problems, too (but this is still on our list, and non-trivial..).
Christian
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 5:04 PM, Andy Bunce bunce.andy@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks, I will give it a go. My motivation is to find a restxq config that avoids the "parsing tax".
I am
thinking of trying setting RESTXQPATH to restxq. Then using this structure: webapp -app1 --mod2.xqm
-restxq --app1 ---restmod1.xqm
-static --app1 ---index.html
Where restxq/app/restmod1.xqm etc all have declare base-uri "../../app";
Unless there is another imminent solution to this in the works :-)?
/Andy
On 16 June 2014 14:14, Christian Grün christian.gruen@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Andy,
I agree that relative base-uri declarations should always refer to the location of the current query file, no matter in which context. This should be fixed in the latest snapshot [1].
Thanks, Christian
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Andy Bunce bunce.andy@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi, It seems that in restxq mode relative paths for declare base-uri are resolved differently [1]. If I have
-webapp --folder1 ---mod1.xqm (which has import module namespace xm='test' at
'mod2.xqm';)
---mod2.xqm The import works. If I add declare base-uri "."; to mod1. the import fails, running the same code not via restxq and it works. Is this intended behavior? /Andy
[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-xquery-30-20140408/#id-base-uri-decl