W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-dom-xpath@w3.org > May 2000

RE: Is minimalism a goal?

From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@virgin.net>
Date: Fri, 5 May 2000 18:03:23 +0100
To: <www-dom-xpath@w3.org>
Message-ID: <NDBBKDFLFKGBNPJPGKDFEEIFCDAA.dave.pawson@virgin.net>

     I would either choose:
     #1 with limited syntax support (i.e. selectNodes(pattern), and
     selectSingleNode(pattern), LocationPaths only, no namespace, 
     variable, or
     extensions support), in a separate interface, with some idea of how we
     would scale up to a full featured interface.
     #1+#2+#3, designed so you can do simple things simply.
     If you pushed me hard, I guess I would lean towards #1, 
     published as a note
     within the next couple of months, and wait for #2 and #3 'till the XML
     Query work is a little further along.  Though, without 
     namespace support, I
     question how useful it would be.
     > Deciding early on what
     > the goal is will smooth the entire process.

In support of the above #1. 

Primary goal is the 80%, for simple, non namespace documents 
that many users are playing with today. No transformation goal,
simply access using xpath.
That cuts out variables, namespace support and
extensions. It gives a restricted proving ground as the 
way to go for query and xpointer.
Puts the marker down and leaves breathing space to 
  learn from use
  look for scalability
  Wait for extensions and the other wg's.

Still leaves the decider, a part of dom, or seperate?
I'd still go seperate, cleanliness being ....

Regards, DaveP
Received on Friday, 5 May 2000 13:03:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:43:07 UTC