W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-voice@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: SCXML: XPath vs E4X

From: RJ Auburn <rj@voxeo.com>
Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 07:37:57 -0400
Message-Id: <F3CF6752-52E8-43B6-AA33-24E827EC49E8@voxeo.com>
Cc: www-voice@w3.org
To: lager@ling.gu.se


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 Auburn
CTO, Voxeo Corporation

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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:07:39 UTC