- From: Cameron McCormack <cam@mcc.id.au>
- Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2007 15:09:54 +1000
- To: public-html@w3.org
Hi Laurens.
Laurens Holst:
> Although I have yet to see why "field1 + field2" is more difficult to
> authors than "$field1 + $field2". Especially when you’re starting to
> create a subset of Javascript, I start to wonder whether it wouldn’t
> just be better to use XPath. But I didn’t really think hard about all
> the turing complete and static analysis bits, so maybe XPath has the
> same issues as JS has there :).
I guess it’s a balance of whether authors are more familiar with
JavaScript or XPath to begin with, and how much subsetting is required
for both.
For either language, there will still need to be (IMO) a mapping of form
field values to identifiers (e.g. using ‘field1’ instead of
‘document.forms[0].field1.value’ in JavaScript, or ‘$field1’ or
‘value('form0', 'field1')’ in XPath).
--
Cameron McCormack, http://mcc.id.au/
xmpp:heycam@jabber.org ▪ ICQ 26955922 ▪ MSN cam@mcc.id.au
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2007 05:10:11 UTC