- From: Elvis Stansvik <elvstone@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:31:55 +0200
- To: Jim Barnett <jim.barnett@genesys.com>
- Cc: "www-voice@w3.org" <www-voice@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAHms=ea3oo4qH5aAMjs4agf_4hn-rtoY67MuRwYJqeib6+qAnw@mail.gmail.com>
2014-10-21 0:24 GMT+02:00 Jim Barnett <jim.barnett@genesys.com>: > Elvis, > There are three implementations of the XPath data model that I am aware > of, though none of them have yet submitted implementation reports. From > comments from the developers of those implementations, I gather that > finding a suitable XPath implementation requires some thought. > Ah, right. I completely misread that e-mail as saying there weren't any, my bad. And yes I can imagine it requires some thought. But no way around that really, it's not like In() can be dropped from the spec. Elvis Jim > > > > On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:15 PM, Elvis Stansvik <elvstone@gmail.com> wrote: > > (Sorry. Forgot to send my answer to list) > > 2014-10-20 23:40 GMT+02:00 Jim Barnett <1jhbarnett@gmail.com>: > >> Elvis, >> I will have to check with other group members before giving a >> definitive reply, but we do intend to specify XPath 1.0, while we like >> 2.0's definition of effective Boolean value to describe what to do when you >> pull a value out of XPath into SCXML in a Boolean context. I will have to >> make sure we think that this is acceptably clear spec language. >> > > Ah. Then I see the reason. Maybe it could be made more explicit what > role the different references has. But good that you'll bring it up. > > >> Note that you can build your data model on XPath 2 if you want. You just >> have to give it a different name than the one we define. Data models are >> intended to be pluggable and extensible, and you aren't limited to the ones >> that we define. >> > > Yep. Upon reading further I realized that, and also saw in some earlier > mail that there are no actual implementations of the XPath data model yet. > Is that still the case? > > One thing about implementing that is a little problematic is that not > all XPath implementations allow you to define custom functions, which is > needed to add the In(), and I think that some which do allow it will only > allow functions with some "prefix:" to be added. Not sure though. This is > of course assuming that you use a pre-built XPath library, and is no > problem if you implement it yourself as part of implementing SCXML. I see > no way around that though, just one thing that limits the selection of > XPath libraries to pick from when implementing. > > Thanks for your answers. > > Elvis > > >> >> Jim Barnett >> Genesys >> >> > On Oct 18, 2014, at 5:55 AM, Elvis Stansvik <elvstone@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Hi folks, >> > >> > I only just heard about SCXML.. I got interested and started reading >> the spec. >> > >> > In "B.3 The XPath Data Model", the section starts out by referencing >> XPath 1.0: >> > >> > "Implementations that support this data model must support [XPath >> 1.0]." >> > >> > But then in "B.3.2 Conditional Expressions" goes on to require XPath >> 2.0: >> > >> > "The SCXML Processor must accept any XPath expression as >> > a conditional expression and must convert it into its effective >> > boolean value as described in section 2.4.3 of the [XPath 2.0] >> > specification." >> > >> > Could someone clarify? Should the first reference be to XPath 2.0 or is >> the discrepancy intended? >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Elvis Stansvik >> > >
Received on Monday, 20 October 2014 22:32:22 UTC