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

Re: nasty namespace issue (was RE: Is minimalism a goal?)

From: Francis Norton <francis@redrice.com>
Date: Tue, 09 May 2000 21:07:26 +0100
Message-ID: <39186FFE.57F33CE2@redrice.com>
To: dave.pawson@virgin.net
CC: www-dom-xpath@w3.org
Dave Pawson wrote:
> 
> Since most things are a response to this header :-)
> 
> A topic on xsl list today noted the
> functional environment availability.
> 
> Any thoughts how far this should go
> in a tight (not minimalist) spec,
> guessing the ultimate would be for
> full xpath list of functions available?
> 
> My vote would be for all xpath functions.
> 
DOM's hasfeature() could be used for this, but unless anyone has a
strong case for not implementing the full set of functions (and they
don't look too scary to me) I think the any compliant DOM XPath
implementation should just implement the lot, and leave hasfeature() for
querying whatever is tricky enough to be left optional. Liek XPath
itself!

Francis.
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2000 16:08:23 UTC

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