[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XPointer crisis

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XPointer crisis
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 15:10:46 -0500
• In-reply-to: <20020201144101.E29819@r...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <1012587257.27106.38.camel@l...> <5.1.0.14.0.20020201134448.029015c8@157.189.161.214> <20020201144101.E29819@r...>

On Friday 01 February 2002 02:41 pm, Daniel Veillard wrote:
>   If you think that
>      #foo
> is simple and fast, yes in a very well defined context, in general
> it's an horrible solution, you have to rely on something outside the
> document itself to simply make that request. //*[@id=foo] at least
> can work directly on the document.

FWIW. This is why I disagreed with the bare names in XPointer. The 
only reason they might exist is to placate HTML folk, IMNSHO.

• References:
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@s...>
  • Re: XPointer crisis
    • From: Daniel Veillard <veillard@r...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPointer crisis
• Next by Date: RE: XPointer crisis
• Previous by thread: Re: XPointer crisis
• Next by thread: Re: XPointer crisis
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread