Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I'm not 100% sure, but downgrading from XPath to CSS3 Selectors is > probably easier. Except for cases like 'a:link', 'a:visited', but I'm > not sure if those are necessary. > > I guess that a subset of CSS3 Selectors should be defined, which is > compatible with XPath (this means disallowing various pseudo-classes). A common subset has been considered that would not include the pseudo-* stuff from CSS and not include XPath's generic and richer options. Using that common functionality, irrespective of which syntax is used implementing one on top of the other would be a simple grammar translation with very little overhead. -- Robin BerjonReceived on Friday, 3 September 2004 15:14:55 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:54:51 GMT