W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > August 2006

[wbs] response to 'Grabbing syntax - XPath, Selectors, what?'

From: WBS Mailer on behalf of <webmaster@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2006 21:25:02 +0000
To: www-archive@w3.org
Message-Id: <wbs-a536ee538e8c62891d71514a724058c8@cgi.w3.org>

Here are the answers submitted to 'Grabbing syntax - XPath, Selectors,
what?' (the public) for Chris Lilley.

I would expect to use
I would expect the attribute to hold a value in the following syntax

 * ( ) CSS Selectors, as used in CSS3 (the full deal, with negation and
everything)W3C Working Draft 15 December 2005; Last Call Ends 16 January
 * (x) XPath 1.0 because, well, its XML! W3C Recommendation 16 November
 * ( ) XPath 2.0, because types matter and schemas are good. W3C Candidate
Recommendation 8 June 2006; CR ends 28 February 2006 
 * ( ) XQuery, because SQL is wonderful W3C Candidate Recommendation 8
June 2006; CR ends 28 February 2006 
 * ( ) IDREF because I would expect it all to be in the same document
 * ( ) A URI with a fragment identifier pointing to the ID of the element
because anything useful will have an ID, surely
 * ( ) A syntax of my own invention, or one you foolishly omitted to list
above despite its clear advantages (give details)

widely implemented, and what people expect for XML. IDREF or URI-with-frag
are too limiting, and XQuery or Xpath 2 are too heavy just now. Nobody
knows CSS3 selectors.

These answers were last modified on 7 August 2006 at 21:17:13 U.T.C.
by Chris Lilley

Answers to this questionnaire can be set and changed at
http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/1/xPath-vs-CSSSelectors/ until 2006-08-11.


 The Automatic WBS Mailer
Received on Monday, 7 August 2006 21:25:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:32:58 UTC