- From: RJ Auburn <rj@voxeo.com>
- Date: Fri, 11 May 2007 07:37:57 -0400
- To: lager@ling.gu.se
- Cc: www-voice@w3.org
Torbjörn, We in the SCXML working group are actually right now in the middle of abstracting out the expression language to make it easy to define SCXML interpreters with things like ecmascript+e4x. The current thought is to require XPath but allow the use of others easily. RJ --- RJ Auburn CTO, Voxeo Corporation tel:+1-407-418-1800 On May 11, 2007, at 7:14 AM, Torbjörn Lager wrote: > > In the January 2006 draft I read: > > "We have not determined how the XML trees that compose the data model > will be specified, accessed, and modified. (Candidates include the DOM > API, E4X, and XPath.)" > > In the current draft one gets the impression that you selected XPath. > May I ask why you made this choice? Looking at it now, I get the > impression that E4X would have been a better choice, since it seems > more tightly integrated with ECMAScript. Is there any chance that you > will revisit this issue? > > - Torbjörn >
Received on Friday, 11 May 2007 11:38:21 UTC