Torbjörn, We in the SCXML working group are actually right now in the middle of abstracting out the expression language to make it easy to define SCXML interpreters with things like ecmascript+e4x. The current thought is to require XPath but allow the use of others easily. RJ --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 On May 11, 2007, at 7:14 AM, Torbjörn Lager wrote: > > In the January 2006 draft I read: > > "We have not determined how the XML trees that compose the data model > will be specified, accessed, and modified. (Candidates include the DOM > API, E4X, and XPath.)" > > In the current draft one gets the impression that you selected XPath. > May I ask why you made this choice? Looking at it now, I get the > impression that E4X would have been a better choice, since it seems > more tightly integrated with ECMAScript. Is there any chance that you > will revisit this issue? > > - Torbjörn >Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 11:38:21 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 11 May 2007 11:38:38 GMT