Re: POLL: Fwd: Re: XPath filter 2.0

r/reagle@w3.org/2002.06.10/17:16:48
>So to conclude the thread I'd like to know what people prefer:
>1. Move forward with what we have presently [3].
>2. Specify Merlin's proposal (The timing of this will be 
>dependent on properly representing the proposal (e.g., Merlin's time 
><smile/>) and then reviewing and iterating on it a few times to make sure 
>we have it clear.)

I believe that I've unilaterally eliminated anybody's choice
in this matter, for which I apologize.

Attached is, probably not as clear as it could be, my
alternative proposal in more explicit language, along with
interop samples.

Note that intersect/subtract are unchanged from before;
there is just the benefit that multiple ops can be done
in a single transform. However; union is different: It
is effectively applied against just the input node set.
You'll see the language in the spec, along with verbiage 
on optimizing N XPath operations into a single sweep
through the document. This also solves the bizarre null
UNION foo from before.

It's late, so I've checked neither the spec nor the
examples for sanity.

Merlin