- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 14:57:36 -0700
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <28d56ece0704291457o7d33261budef6410595dc85bd@mail.gmail.com>
On 4/29/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > > / Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> was heard to say: > | The rest have definable semantics for handling inner matches: > | > | * p:insert - it is well defined where the insertion happens for each > | match regardless of whether one is contained in another. The > canonical > | example here is inserting a paragraph into every 'div' in an XHTML > | document. > > It should be made explicit that the matching doesn't proceed inside > the inserted content. Yes, I suppose. Since matches are performed on the input document and the insertion is place in the output, it can't happen anyway. | * p:rename - Renaming an element doesn't affect its child. > > So nested elements are all renamed? Yes. | * p:unwrap - Removing an element wrapper doesn't affect its children. > > So nested elements are also unwrapped? Yes. | * p:wrap - Added an element wrapper doesn't affect its children. > > So nested elements are also wrapped? Yes. We could also add a "no-nested-matches" option that turns off processing of nested matches. A value of 'true' wouldn't process inner matches. -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Sunday, 29 April 2007 21:57:40 UTC