W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > June 2014

Re: [css-gcpm] content() function doesn't allow formatting of values

From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:50:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAWBYDCP5LgnWTrbyQ8OW+_0wdi7_TRX=b5fBBcmQHYmGJz+jw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Liam Quin <liam@w3.org>
Cc: Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz>, W3C Style <www-style@w3.org>
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Liam R E Quin <liam@w3.org> wrote:
> [...]
>
> A couple of possible (relatively minor) misunderstandings here I
> think...
>
>
>> Let me be clearer, though: there is no way we'd add XQuery to CSS.
> Nor SQL for that matter, nor Python. XQuery is a fully-fledged languaged
> used for applications, that sits on top of and extends XPath.
>
> To be clear here, though, XQuery is not the same as XPath, and I don't
> think anyone here is suggesting that XQuery be added to the Web
> Platform.
>
> XPath 1 is already in the browser, and there have in the past been XPath
> hooks to CSS, although it would be better to use XPath 3, the current
> version, rather than the 1999 XPath 1.
>
> Better yet for CSS in some ways would be XSLT 3 match patterns, a subset
> of XPath designed for streaming.
>
>>  It's a
>> redundant query language that browser's are not interested in. Following
>> its *model* for something is possible, but I think it's far more useful to
>> align with JS APIs, as authors in general are far more likely to be
>> familiar with JS stuff.
>
> A large part of XML's success (and sometimes its failing) is that it
> allows document people, who often don't think of themselves as
> programmers, to do fairly sophisticated text processing; not everyone
> who works with documents wants to be a JavaScript programmer.
>
> There's some interest from the XML side in documenting XPath (and maybe
> XSLT) in the HTML 5 sort of way, and possibly coming up with a subset of
> XPath 3 that's close to what browsers already implement (i.e. backwards
> compatible but perhaps with some of the additional features that were
> found to be needed over the years and that are in XPath 3). But I think
> that's a separate conversation.

Indeed. ^_^

~TJ
Received on Monday, 16 June 2014 19:51:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:39:22 UTC