• From: Philippe Poulard <philippe.poulard@s...>
• To: Philippe Poulard <Philippe.Poulard@s...>
• Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 11:05:44 +0200

Philippe Poulard a écrit :
> Mukul Gandhi a écrit :
>> Hi all,
>>    I wrote the following blog post. This is perhaps a weird thought,
>> for people having worked with XML for long.
>>
>> http://mukulgandhi.blogspot.com/2008/09/should-we-include-version10-in-xpath.html 
>>
>>
>> This is a short description of the points I have in mind.
>>
>> Could you please let us know, if my logic have any merit.
>>
> 
> Perhaps exposed as attributes ?
> 
> /@version
> /@standalone
> /@encoding
> 
> This would have the advantage to keep as-is the XML syntax

Error: I was talking about the XPath syntax, of course :)

The 3 expressions above are syntaxically correct

-- 
Cordialement,

               ///
              (. .)
  --------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------
|      Philippe Poulard       |
  -----------------------------
  http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
        Have the RefleX !

• References:
  • Should we include the XML prolog in the XPath data model, or DOM
    • From: "Mukul Gandhi" <gandhi.mukul@g...>
  • Re: Should we include the XML prolog in the XPath datamodel, or DOM
    • From: Philippe Poulard <philippe.poulard@s...>