• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Doc vs. Data
• From: ari@c... (K. Ari Krupnikov)
• Date: 09 Jun 2003 10:44:44 -0700
• In-reply-to: <01dc01c32d46$589a8c70$6401a8c0@pcukmka>
• References: <01dc01c32d46$589a8c70$6401a8c0@pcukmka>
• Sender: ari@l...
• User-agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2

"Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...> writes:

> > To me they are different languages and there is no special reason to 
> > move to XPath 2.0 (unless of course you really need its features).
> 
> There are only ever two possible reasons to move from XXX 1.0 to XXX
> 2.0: either you need the new features of the new version, or you are
> obliged to move forwards because everyone else is doing so.

Just as long as "everyone else" doesn't include the maintainer of the
XXX 1.0 processor you use.

Ari.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Doc vs. Data
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
  • Re: Doc vs. Data
    • From: Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo@m...>

• References:
  • RE: Doc vs. Data
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: CSS syntax for RDF
• Next by Date: [COMMERCIAL] PropelX available for download
• Previous by thread: Re: Doc vs. Data
• Next by thread: Re: Doc vs. Data
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread