Re: New axes?

From my perspective, the difference between next and following, previous
and preceding would introduce confusion, since in common usage each pair of
terms is generally regarded as synonymous.

OTOH, I have often wanted an easier XPath way to construct the equivalent
of JQuery nextUntil() and prevUntil() -- that would be another topic I
suppose.

jk

On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 10:11 AM Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@gmail.com>
wrote:

>   > An alternative would be to introduce new functions:
>   >
>   >     fn:next-sibling($node as node()?) as node()?
>   >     fn:previous-sibling($node as node()?) as node()?
>
>
> +1 for the functions vs. new axes.
> This can be conveniently combined with the arrow operator:
>
> $myXpathExpressionSelectingNode => next-sibling()
>
> Thanks,
> Dimitre
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 2:08 AM Christian Grün <cg@basex.org> wrote:
>
>> An alternative would be to introduce new functions:
>>
>>   fn:next-sibling($node as node()?) as node()?
>>   fn:previous-sibling($node as node()?) as node()?
>>
>> Similar to fn:has-children, we cannot perform straightforward node
>> tests. The requirement for such tests may depend on the use cases we
>> are trying to solve.
>> ____________________________________
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 10:51 AM Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > It's a fairly cosmetic change to get rid of a minor ugliness. People
>> often forget the [1] qualifier when they only want the immediately
>> following sibling, and the difference between
>> preceding-sibling::*[predicate][1] and preceding-sibling::*[1][predicate]
>> isn't intuitive.
>> >
>> > The problem of course is that you can never get rid of a danger point
>> on a well-trodden road by providing a new shiny road; the very people who
>> fall into the trap will be unaware of the new features.
>> >
>> > Michael Kay
>> > Saxonica
>> >
>> > On 2 Dec 2020, at 09:38, Norm Tovey-Walsh <norm@saxonica.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Michael Kay <mike@saxonica.com> writes:
>> >
>> > How would anyone feel about adding new axes next::* and previous::* to
>> > get the first following/preceding sibling?
>> >
>> > Or next-sibling / previous-sibling if people prefer long names.
>> >
>> > It would have to be that next::* means following-sibling::*[1]
>> >
>> >
>> > Can next::* ever be different from (following-sibling::*)[1]?
>> >
>> > Another two candidates are following-sibling-or-self::* and
>> > preceding-sibling-or-self::*, with hopefully obvious semantics.
>> >
>> >
>> > What are the use cases for these?
>> >
>> > To me, it feels like adding a new axis is a fairly heavyweight change.
>> > There are already quite a few axes and I think users sometimes struggle
>> > to understand them. I’m not saying we must not add new axes, but I’d
>> > like to be convinced that their utility justifies them.
>> >
>> >                                        Be seeing you,
>> >                                          norm
>> >
>> > --
>> > Norm Tovey-Walsh
>> > Saxonica
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
> --
> Cheers,
> Dimitre Novatchev
> ---------------------------------------
> Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
> ---------------------------------------
> To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
> -------------------------------------
> Never fight an inanimate object
> -------------------------------------
> To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the
> biggest mistake of all
> ------------------------------------
> Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.
> -------------------------------------
> You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
> you're doing is work or play
> -------------------------------------
> To achieve the impossible dream, try going to sleep.
> -------------------------------------
> Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
> -------------------------------------
> Typing monkeys will write all Shakespeare's works in 200yrs.Will they
> write all patents, too? :)
> -------------------------------------
> Sanity is madness put to good use.
> -------------------------------------
> I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.
>
>


-- 
Joel Kalvesmaki
kalvesmaki.com