RE: XPath 2.0 is not XPath 2.0

It's good to see comments on the drafts, but please do send your reactions
to the official feedback address. Some members of both working groups read
this list but not everyone does; and it's really best if what reaches the
groups isn't filtered by people like me who will inevitably want to pass
some comments on and not others.

Mike Kay

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of David
> Rosenborg
> Sent: 20 December 2001 19:46
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:  XPath 2.0 is not XPath 2.0
>
>
> Hi!
>
> Just skimmed the new drafts. Both contain
> (much needed) new stuff which looks well designed
> at a first glance. But, when I reach the sections
> about incompatibility I get so disappointed!
> While XSLT 2.0 is OK (apart from its dependancy
> on XPath 2.0), XPath 2.0 looks so very wrong.
> There might be a million reasons for the incompatible
> changes, but then you should call it something else,
> XFooPath 1.0 or whatever. It simply doesn't feel
> like a worthy (and still much needed) successor to
> XPath 1.0.
>
> Incompatible changes in syntax is OK, you can fix them
> automatically, and they are catched at compile/load-time.
> Changes in semantics is a no no. If for example Java had
> taken the same path I think there would be no Java today.
>
> And I don't think the stylesheet version attribute is the
> solution. Of course a processor could trigger on the
> attribute and run in version 1.0 or 2.0 mode accordingly.
> But imagine how wonderful it would be if I, as a developer,
> could just change the version attribute to 2.0 and
> start using the new stuff with no worries. I can't just see
> what was gained by sacrificing this.
>
> (So much for forward compatibility :-)
>
> Here's an idea:
>
> Decouple XSLT and XPath! Make the expression language
> a choice of the developer. Then you could use XSLT to
> do schema/type dense processing if you specify XFooPath 1.0
> as the expression language or you could just enhance your
> 1.0 stylsheets with some new cool stuff if you specify XPath 2.0
> (the real successor :-)
>
> If this idea is too wild, please at least change the name and
> let there be a real, backwards compatible, XSLT / XPath 2.0
> combination.
>
> Cheers
>
> </David>
>
> David Rosenborg
> Pantor Engineering AB
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list