W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > August 2006

[wbs] response to 'Grabbing syntax - XPath, Selectors, what?'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2006 13:25:02 +0000
To: innovimax+w3c@gmail.com,www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-fa394bee7d0872c2a95d0e5ab97d4ef6@cgi.w3.org>


Here are the answers submitted to 'Grabbing syntax - XPath, Selectors,
what?' (the public) for Mohamed ZERGAOUI.



---------------------------------
I would expect to use
----
I would expect the attribute to hold a value in the following syntax



 * ( ) CSS Selectors, as used in CSS3 (the full deal, with negation and
everything)W3C Working Draft 15 December 2005; Last Call Ends 16 January
2006
 * (x) XPath 1.0 because, well, its XML! W3C Recommendation 16 November
1999
 * ( ) XPath 2.0, because types matter and schemas are good. W3C Candidate
Recommendation 8 June 2006; CR ends 28 February 2006 
 * ( ) XQuery, because SQL is wonderful W3C Candidate Recommendation 8
June 2006; CR ends 28 February 2006 
 * ( ) IDREF because I would expect it all to be in the same document
 * ( ) A URI with a fragment identifier pointing to the ID of the element
because anything useful will have an ID, surely
 * ( ) A syntax of my own invention, or one you foolishly omitted to list
above despite its clear advantages (give details)

Rationale: 
but only the location subset


These answers were last modified on 8 August 2006 at 13:22:45 U.T.C.
by Mohamed ZERGAOUI

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/xPath-vs-CSSSelectors/ until 2006-08-11.

 Regards,

 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2006 13:25:09 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:00 GMT