• To: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>,michael.h.kay@n...
• Subject: Re: The vision for XPath 2.0
• From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>
• Date: Fri, 10 May 2002 10:20:49 -0700
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200205101715.SAA06579@p...>
• References: <001101c1f845$489f8410$6501a8c0@pcukmka><001101c1f845$489f8410$6501a8c0@pcukmka>

At 06:15 PM 5/10/2002 +0100, David Carlisle wrote:

> > Don't assume that the current boundary as to which
> > parts of XQuery are in XPath and which aren't is in any way final: it
> > changes by the day.
>
>If we thought it was final we wouldn't be discussing it at all, we'd
>just learn to live with it (or stick with XPath 1 if that seemed more
>appropriate). But if things are in flux, surely now's the time for
>comments (not on this list though as you've pointed out before:-)

Absolutely! Both here (to inform ourselves) and on the public feedback 
list, where it will have to be responded to officially:

public-qt-comments@w...

Jonathan

• References:
  • RE: The vision for XPath 2.0
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
  • Re: The vision for XPath 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: XPath 2.0 - how much of XQuery should it include?
• Next by Date: Re: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Previous by thread: Re: The vision for XPath 2.0
• Next by thread: Stopping the SAX parser
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread