Re: XPointer crisis
At 03:05 PM 2/1/2002 -0500, Gavin Thomas Nicol wrote: >On Friday 01 February 2002 02:08 pm, Jonathan Robie wrote: > > I think XPointer is useful, but it should not own the fragment > > identifier. That should be reserved for something *much* simpler. > >Perhaps that is the *real* issue? We keep hearing about complexity, >but implementation experience says that XPointer is only incrementally >worse than XPath (which for many things is way overkill). Right. I am not saying that XPointer is too complex for a mortal to implement, I am just saying that it is way too complex to be the only standard way to point into an XML document. For people who write efficient server-side software, a pointer must be very simple, not a moderately sized query language. Full-featured client-side hypertext systems have very different needs, and these are the needs directly addressed by XPointer today. The strongest architectural need is for simple pointers, but there are also people who need complex hypertext systems. As long as we don't conflate the two, we can have both. Jonathan
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format