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

Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer

• To: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
• Subject: Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2002 17:09:47 -0600
• Cc: simonstl@s..., xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: Message from Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...> of "Sat, 26 Oct 2002 10:40:04 EDT." <p04330103b9e057680bef@[192.168.254.4]>
• Sender: uche.ogbuji@f...

> >I'm a little surprised that you seem [from the last sentence of section
> >3] to see the scheme as providing a way of addressing within an XML
> >entity, rather than an XML document. In fact, I think it would be most
> >useful to say that both entity expansion and XInclude processing should
> >happen before XPath evaluation.
> 
> Entity expansion is a good idea. I don't think the XPath data model 
> really applies unless entities have been expanded. XInclude 
> resolution is trickier. The proper result of applying an XPath 
> expression to a document containing XInclude is completely 
> unambiguous, and it does not involve XInclude resolution.

It's only "completely unambiguous" to you, in the Gospel According to 
Elliotte.  I'm having none of your religion.  We've had this argument before 
on the hard facts, and you were not able to establish why a processor cannot 
choose to expand XIncludes in processing before it gets to XPath.  You even 
tried to strong-arm various XML working groups to add "errata" to confirm your 
side of the argument, in direct contradiction of your recent Gospel According 
to Elliotte on spec errata.

The game is getting old, and I'm weary of playing.  I'll continue to, as I 
said, XInclude where I bloody want to.  If any future spec puts in rules about 
XInclude order processing, and I choose to implement those specs, then I shall 
respect their stipulations.


> Consider, for example, the XPath expression //xinclude:include.

I've considered it.  I don't see a point in this dangling example.


> Thinking about this, I suspect it's a URI level question. The 
> document before XInclude resolution is not the same as the document 
> after XInclude resolution. These are two different documents. They 
> are two different resources. They need to have distinguishable URIs. 
> Unfortunately right now they don't.

Wow.  Too bad for content negotiation that in your world differing 
representations MUST have differing URIs.  Too bad for you that the real world 
is much more complex.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                                    Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net    http://4Suite.org    http://fourthought.com
Python&XML column: 2. Introducing PyXML - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/09/25/p
y.html
The Past, Present and Future of Web Services 1 - http://www.webservices.org/ind
ex.php/article/articleview/663/1/24/
The Past, Present and Future of Web Services 2 - 'http://www.webservices.org/in
dex.php/article/articleview/679/1/24/
Serenity through markup - http://adtmag.com/article.asp?id=6807
Tip: Using generators for XML processing - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerwork
s/xml/library/x-tipgenr.html

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>
  • Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • RE: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Re: What are Schemas For?
• Next by Date: Re: The XML 500 word Challenge
• Previous by thread: RE: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• Next by thread: Re: ANN: xpath1() scheme for XPointer
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread