- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2007 08:11:16 +0100
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
Grosso, Paul wrote: > Jeni Tennison wrote: >> There are some components that must take a select expression because >> they contain XPaths that must be evaluated relative to the >> context node. >> >> . . . >> >> This argues (fairly strongly, I think) for defining options >> as patterns rather than expressions. > > What am I missing? I think you're missing the "In other cases," at the beginning of the third paragraph. To summarise: 1. Options that return values other than nodes must be expressions. 2. Options that identify nodes relative to a non-document context node must be expressions. 3. Other options should be patterns. For example, the 'replace' option on p:string-replace has to be an expression both because it returns a string and because it is evaluated relative to the node whose value is being replaced. But the option that identifies the nodes whose values should be replaced should be a pattern (and therefore called match). Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Friday, 27 April 2007 07:11:19 UTC