W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > November 2002

Re: [svg-developers] Re: some discussion of SVG 1.2

From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2002 18:12:08 +0100
Message-ID: <3DD91F68.5030008@expway.fr>
To: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
CC: www-svg@w3.org

Jim Ley wrote:
> "Tobias Reif" <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com> wrote in message
> news:3DD9166A.9000601@pinkjuice.com...
>>Kurt Cagle wrote:
>>>I'd think strongly about implementing XPath 2.0
 >>
>>This would be very useful, save lots of code, and ease maintenace.
> 
> The syntax surely can't use the namespace prefix to make a judgement -
> what would happen in the following situation:
> 
> <g xmlns:ex="urn:moo">
> <rect x="0" y="0" height="10" width="10" ex:type="stepBox"/>
> <rect x="20" y="20" height="10" width="10" ex:type="stepBox"/>
> </g>
> 
> then if I insert another rect
> <rect x="10" y="10" width="10" height="10" ex:type="stepBox"
> xmlns:ex="urn:min"/>
> 
> that surely can't respond to the mouseover events too?

Of course not. Presumably, prefixes in the XPath expressions would be mapped to 
namespaces based on the current namespace context, as it is in XSLT.

Having seen a mention of XPath 2.0, I must say I shiver slightly. I'd be rather 
enclined to stick to XPath 1.0, or to define a XPath 2.0 Basic without the 
schema information :)

-- 
Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
Research Engineer, Expway
7FC0 6F5F D864 EFB8 08CE  8E74 58E6 D5DB 4889 2488
Received on Monday, 18 November 2002 12:12:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 March 2013 15:54:23 GMT