- From: Innovimax SARL <innovimax@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 12:14:00 +0200
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Ok I try to rephrase I think what disturbs me is to put at the same level [[ if the context node is bound to p:empty, or is unbound ]] I think that all your argument are good for the case of an unbound document But not for the case where the user set it to p:empty unless I still miss something... Mohamed On Tue, Jul 22, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote: > / "Innovimax SARL" <innovimax@gmail.com> was heard to say: > | Ok, I can see the benefit > | > | But why on p:xpath-context only ? why not for all use of XPath 2.0 ? > > Where else can this error occur? Most places get their default context > From the default readable port and fail if there is no such port. We > don't require a readable port for xpath-context because it's often > meaningful to have expressions that don't require a context. > > Be seeing you, > norm > > -- > Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Great men too make mistakes, and many > http://nwalsh.com/ | among them do it so often that one is > | almost tempted to call them little > | men.-- Lichtenberg > -- Innovimax SARL Consulting, Training & XML Development 9, impasse des Orteaux 75020 Paris Tel : +33 9 52 475787 Fax : +33 1 4356 1746 http://www.innovimax.fr RCS Paris 488.018.631 SARL au capital de 10.000 €
Received on Wednesday, 23 July 2008 10:14:44 UTC