[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: [Fwd: FW: "Roots" of confusion introduced at W3C]
Andrew Watt's point about terminology mismatches is probably valid. Part of the problem here is that there are multiple legitimate definitions of "root". The question is, root of _what_? It may mean the root element of a document, which the DOM calls the Document Element. Or it may mean the root of the tree -- in which case you have to specify what kind of tree you're talking about. I believe XPath's definition of root node corresponds roughly to the DOM's Document node. But the DOM may have detached trees whose (tree) root may be a different kind of node. And some folks have argued that XPath should be usable on subtrees/nodesets other than full documents, which would require a similar concept of a local/contextual root. There may be other variations. It seems to me that if we're going to reconcile these, we have to first enumerate and describe what the real concepts are. Then we can figure out which are and aren't similar enough to use the same name... and what names to use. We may in fact discover that the term "root" really should apply to more than one but has to be qualfied into "document root" versus "subtree root" versus some other flavor(s). ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
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
|