- From: Paul Cotton <pcotton@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 06:15:00 -0800
- To: "Laurens Holst" <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>
- Cc: <www-xpath-comments@w3.org>
Please send your XPath 2.0 comments to public-qt-comments@w3.org as per the directions in the draft XPath 2.0 specification [1]. /paulc [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/WD-xpath20-20041029/ Paul Cotton, Microsoft Canada 17 Eleanor Drive, Nepean, Ontario K2E 6A3 Tel: (613) 225-5445 Fax: (425) 936-7329 mailto:pcotton@microsoft.com > -----Original Message----- > From: www-xpath-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:www-xpath-comments- > request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Laurens Holst > Sent: November 17, 2004 8:31 AM > To: www-xpath-comments@w3.org > Subject: following/preceding-sibling shorthands in XPath 2.0 > > > What about creating shorthands for following-sibling and > preceding-sibling in XPath 2.0? > > following-sibling::chapter[fn:position() = 1] could be > +chapter[1] > > and > > preceding-sibling::chapter[fn:position() = 1] could be > -chapter[1] > > Neither + or - are legal characters to start an XML element name with, > so I think this syntax is possible. Other usage examples would be +[1] > and -[1] for +*[1] and -*[1]. > > In my company's product we have changed from our own targeting method to > XPath (shorthand notation), and this is one thing we're missing. We use > these selectors so often that we currently defined our own syntax for it > ('~+chapter[1]' and '~-chapter[1]'), but we would prefer to use a > standardized method. > > > ~Grauw > > -- > Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
Received on Wednesday, 17 November 2004 14:14:42 UTC