- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 01 Jun 2013 00:43:22 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22122
Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |erik@bruchez.org
--- Comment #2 from Erik Bruchez <erik@bruchez.org> ---
Thanks for the response. We have decided to use the XPath 3 serialize()
function nonetheless to facilitate future compatibility with XPath 3.
The practical reason not to require XPath 3 is the lack of implementations at
this time, in particular open source implementations. Most XForms
implementations do not implement their own XPath engine but use an existing
one. Also, a number of XForms implementations are open source and require an
open source XPath implementation as well.
Requiring XPath 3 would mean that no conformant XForms 2 implementation could
be realistically produced in a reasonable amount of time (this year).
Note that with XForms 2, the expression language is defined in a separate
module, which currently defines support for XPath 2 and XPath 1 in
compatibility mode. This includes an xpath-version attribute, and an
implementation can choose to support XPath 3 if it chooses so.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 1 June 2013 00:43:27 UTC