Re: Level 3 XPath doesn't feel right

WARNING: Unsanitized content follows.
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 31 October 2002 3:44 pm, Joseph Kesselman inspired the electrons 
to say:
> On Tuesday, 10/29/2002 at 09:11 EST, "Dominic Chambers"
> <> wrote:
> > 1. XPathEvaluator should be implemented by objects  that currently
> implement
> > Node, not
> >     Document, since you need to have  the context node anyway, and
> > node.evaluate(expr),
> >     is cleaner and more OO than  document.evalute(expr, node).
> In isolation, I would agree with you. However, I believe the intent was to
> allow stand-alone implementations of the XPathEvaluator which could be
> combined with DOMs that don't directly support this feature; the process
> of obtaining the evaluator would be different but thereafter the code
> would be the same, minimizing the multi-pathing/recoding needed to go from
> built-in to stand-alone implementations or vice versa. If we accept that
> goal, we do need to be able to pass the node explicitly.

While I definitely can  agree with your thoughts why XPathEvaluator is _now_ 
as it is, I also can understand Dominic Chambers. The problem is, that I 
can't imagine _ANY_ usecase for a standalone XPath Module implementaion. Why? 
Because I don't know any XML/DOM implementator who doesn't want to implement 
the XPath module, too. It would be a missing feature by the implementator 
wich would just let me choose another implementation instead of writing my 
own XPath module for that DOM implementation.

It's usually for a W3 reference implementation to cover most parts 
recommented. E.g. you'll never find a standalone Events module 
implementation, a standalone LS or AS implementation for (probably a 
specific) DOM implementation. It's more usual to cover them all in one 
package, isn't it?

Think of Xalan/Xerces, Mozilla, MSXML, libxml, (libXee, ) probably Saxon, and 

Christian Parpart.
Version: GnuPG v1.2.0 (GNU/Linux)


Received on Thursday, 31 October 2002 11:43:58 UTC