- 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