• To: crism@m...
• Subject: Re: Is Anyone Interested In XPath 2.0 Use Cases or Requirements?
• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2002 13:32:08 +0100
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <5.1.0.14.0.20020709040808.00a6a080@m...>(crism@m...)
• References: < <8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621DB4@r...><8BD7226E07DDFF49AF5EF4030ACE0B7E06621DB4@r...> <5.1.0.14.0.20020709040808.00a6a080@m...>

> Um... (thinks, scribbles in *scratch*, checks spec)

Ah I accidentally demonstrated the first law of Xpath:
If you are about to write  != then write not(   =  ) instead.

Of course it proves both my point 
  Yes it can be done in Xpath 1
and Dare's
  Yes it is unreadable and prone to user error without some extra set
  operation primitives.

Unfortunately as things stand to get the extra set operations
you have to get the whole of XPath 2 which means that you go from a
usable language with a few obscure quirks to something that is
completely obscure, non portable and unusable. Progress of a sort I
suppose.



David


_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet
delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further
information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call
Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service.

• References:
  • RE: Is Anyone Interested In XPath 2.0 Use Cases or Requirements?
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: Is Anyone Interested In XPath 2.0 Use Cases or Requirements?
    • From: "Christopher R. Maden" <crism@m...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Slightly off, but... was: XUL appears to be dead, isthere some other standard that should be looked at
• Next by Date: text, regular expressions
• Previous by thread: Re: Is Anyone Interested In XPath 2.0 Use Cases or Requirements?
• Next by thread: Database Modeling
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread