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

Re: Quick Xpath

• To: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Subject: Re: Quick Xpath
• From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@g...>
• Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 19:11:46 +0200
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <E17VDS8-0001TX-00@m...>
• Organization: Eternia Pub. Inc.
• References: <bob@w...> of "Thu, 18 Jul 2002 10:55:16 EDT." <Pine.LNX.3.96.1020718105304.31215C-100000@e...> <E17VDS8-0001TX-00@m...>

* Uche Ogbuji wrote:
>But a question remains.  Are sequences part of the problem you see in XPath 
>2.0?  Or are the complicating details all the *ahem* other ahem stuff that has 
>been discussed and deplored ad nauseam in this forum?
>
>This is important because if, like me, you see a handful of really useful 
>things in XPath 2.0 buried in mounds of waste, then you should be sure to tell 
>the group precisely what you find useful.  This will allow/encourage them to 
>establish a conformance level of XPath 2.0 with which implementors such as you 
>and me can content ourselves.

http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/1021601879.2292.105.camel@dirk

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Quick Xpath
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• References:
  • Re: Quick Xpath
    • From: bob mcwhirter <bob@w...>
  • Re: Quick Xpath
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: generating DOM from ill-formed HTML docs
• Next by Date: RE: URIs and Names on the Web
• Previous by thread: Re: Quick Xpath
• Next by thread: Re: Quick Xpath
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread