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

Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns

• To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>
• Subject: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• From: bob mcwhirter <bob@w...>
• Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2002 10:25:56 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1033481088.3669.880.camel@ibook>

On 1 Oct 2002, Eric van der Vlist wrote:

> On Tue, 2002-10-01 at 15:54, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> > Hi Jim,
> > 
> > > lets be honest, Jeni, the silence from most users is mainly due to
> > > the investment in time to review the bewildering array of documents
> > 
> > Yes, and I think that's the same reason why W3C XML Schema got so far
> > before people started to complain about its complexity -- people won't
> > read the specs until they need to in order to use the technology, by
> > which time it's usually too late to change the technology into
> > something useful. (Though I guess that led to RELAX NG; perhaps
> > that's a route to follow...)
> 
> I don't know how representative it is, but there is also at least one
> person (me) who has started to read these specs, seen that he didn't
> agree with the requirements and didn't consider that the addded
> complexity over XPath 1.0 is not worth the pain IHO and just can't
> comment because he has no comments except "I'll stay with XPath 1.0 and
> exslt as much as I can"...

This is pretty much my opinion and that of the jaxen team (http://jaxen.org/).

XML without XPath-1 is pretty painful.

XML without XPath-2 is perfectly conceivable, if I have XPath-1.

	-bob

• References:
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by Date: Re: XML document/message versioning -- possible model?
• Previous by thread: RE: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by thread: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread