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

Re: [dom-xpath] Competing Proposals Proposal

From: Michael Champion <Mike.Champion@softwareag-usa.com>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 09:15:19 -0400
Message-ID: <007801bfb8ef$75a84600$a20c1e18@WORKGROUP>
To: <www-dom-xpath@w3.org>

----- Original Message -----
From: "Scott Boag/CAM/Lotus" <Scott_Boag@lotus.com>
To: <www-dom-xpath@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, May 07, 2000 2:28 PM
Subject: [dom-xpath] Competing Proposals Proposal

> I would propose that we create three rough competing proposals for a DOM
> XPath:
> 1) Ultra Minimal (e.g. Microsoft/Oracle selectNodes as they exist today).
> 2) Minimal but with separate interface+namespace context support.
> 3) Complete as makes sense (e.g. full context initialization, variable
> support, maybe matching, maybe compiled queries, etc.)

OK, how about an informal poll.  a) Which of these are *necessary* for the
first round of a DOM-compatible XPath API? b) Which are *sufficient* (i.e.,
we can stop when we get there)?

I personally believe that 1 is necessary (backwards compatibility, make the
simple cases simple) and 2 is sufficient.  3 would be nice for the next
iteration.  I could live with any consensus, however.
Received on Monday, 8 May 2000 09:15:49 UTC

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