• To: AndrewWatt2000@a...,jeni@j...,xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 06:27:38 -0700
• Cc: michael.h.kay@n...
• In-reply-to: <bb.1ff2b4a4.2a0fa9e8@a...>

At 07:20 AM 5/12/2002 -0400, AndrewWatt2000@a... wrote:

>Jonathan told us the other day, as I recall, that XPath users were in 
>favour of XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 as proposed. Again, as I recall, he 
>"happened" not to answer the question as to who said that? Maybe he will 
>clarify now who stated that the XPath community was happy with the proposals.

I think I am being misrepresented rather seriously here.

I have said on several occasions that the reason those features are in 
XPath 2.0 is that some on the Working Groups believe that the XSLT / XPath 
communities want these features. I think that we have several prominent 
members of these communities on XML-Dev. I have been encouraging them to 
express their views as to what is needed, saying that I don't think we 
should add these features if the community does not want them.

>How many in the XPath community were consulted on the question?

I don't know, how many in the XPath community are there on XML-Dev? When I 
started the thread, "XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?", I 
think that amounts to consulting them.

Jonathan

• References:
  • XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
    • From: AndrewWatt2000@a...

• Prev by Date: RE: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• Next by Date: RE: Patent non-proliferation and disarmament
• Previous by thread: [Off-Topic] Invisible Foot (Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions)
• Next by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 - Assumptions
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread