• To: "Uche Ogbuji" <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Subject: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• From: "David Rosenborg" <darolst@p...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 10:53:08 +0200
• Cc: "Jeni Tennison" <jeni@j...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <E17yRjQ-00059n-00@m...>

Uche Ogbuji wrote:

> I would strongly oppose a move for abbreviation of extension axes.  For one 
> thing, this would throw chaos into the idea of having a basic grammar for 
> XPath.  I also think it would be terribly confusing for the users.  What if 
> two groups choose "#" for their abbreviated axis name?  Users could see "#" as 
> meaning type axis in some examples/implementations and "#" meaning hyperlink 
> axis in another.  Would we have to end up with a global registry of abbeviated 
> axis names?  And wouldn't there then be a hasty lang-grab for cute and 
> memorable abbreviations?

I agree, I don't think arbitrary extension axes should have abbreviations.
However, if there was a single axis for this e.g. annotation::, it might be
feasible with an abbrevition.

Cheers,
David

• References:
  • Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• Prev by Date: XPath for Infoset extensions [was Annotations in XPath-NG?]
• Next by Date: Re: SGML on the Web
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Next by thread: Re: XPath/XSLT 2.0 concerns
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread