- From: Henry S. Thompson <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 09 Dec 2005 14:08:14 +0000
- To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@simonstl.com>, Sid Bauman <Syd_Bauman@brown.edu>
- Cc: public-xpointer-registry@w3.org, Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
What shall we do about xpath and xpath1?
Mike, to what extent is xpath2 a superset of xpath1, in terms of the
node set selected?
I'm wondering whether using 'xpath' as a scheme name for only XPath
v. 1 paths will be seen to be downright wrong in due course, or just
misleading. . .
A simple example of a path/document pair where the
XPath-1.0-selected-nodeset is easily seen to be different from the
XPath-2.0-seelcted-nodeset would be a pretty clear counter-indication. . .
ht
- --
Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh
Half-time member of W3C Team
2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
[mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFDmY/OkjnJixAXWBoRAhMIAJ9gOJk9LpEN3mVLMdb4y/zyqRlxIwCffI5e
YWb5OredFCEwVdgFaDlVVKs=
=gavr
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 9 December 2005 14:08:39 UTC