- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:54:31 +0100
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Cc: mozer <xmlizer@gmail.com>, public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Dan Connolly writes:
> Whether they are aliases of XPath 1.0 or XPath 2.0 functions
> makes no difference; they're still aliases.
I think perhaps you misunderstood. There _is no_ XPath 1.0 function
which has the relevant behaviour. So we have defined an extension
function _for XPath 1.0_ whose functionality is defined to be the
XPath 1.0 equivalent of an XPath 2.0 function.
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 651-1426, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFIziLHkjnJixAXWBoRAqINAJ4kpPQLTGL3dA7c/L++62GGQYBlRwCfU3Zr
CnQvmAPKJI4RSqkhz90OkAg=
=nnzU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Monday, 15 September 2008 08:55:08 UTC