- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2005 21:36:29 +0200
- To: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>
- Cc: www-dom@w3.org
Philippe Le Hegaret wrote: > I believe that the SVG is still committed to produce implementations > of them and push the specifications towards W3C Recommendations. Correct. Currently all the energy of the WG is focused on getting Tiny 1.2 out the door, but as soon as that's done we'll look at Full stuff (of which XPath is one) again. If the SVG WG decides to make changes I'll be the editor, so you can bug me with issues if you so want. But then again in the meantime a possible Web Applications WG may take over that work item so... > Correct, as far as I know, we don't have open issues on this draft. > Though, the SVG Working Group might have some. We discussed it briefly in November and indeed we may have some. In particular, our users tend to think that it's overly complicated, which we have attributed (perhaps wrongly) to trying to be forward-compatible with XPath 2.0. Noise was made according to which it would be simpler to drop XP2 support entirely now and revisit it later, and add (optional) CSS support instead. But I haven't done the work to check that it would really simplify things. We were also concerned that a document that has been a Note for that long may be considered stable, and that we therefore shouldn't be touching it too much. We'll get to all that soon. -- Robin Berjon Research Scientist Expway, http://expway.com/
Received on Monday, 4 April 2005 19:36:39 UTC