• To: jonathan.robie@d...
• Subject: Re: XPath brain teaser
• From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
• Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2003 18:17:38 +0100
• Cc: costello@m..., xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <6.0.0.14.0.20030826130847.01cc3cb8@n...>(message from Jonathan Robie on Tue, 26 Aug 2003 13:09:19 -0400)
• References: <3F4B8ED3.20470C69@m...><3F4B8ED3.20470C69@m...> <6.0.0.14.0.20030826130847.01cc3cb8@n...>

> Yup. But Roger has a point - this has confused plenty of people with XPath 1.0.

There are other things to be confused about (Xpath 2 will confuse a lot
more people as its typing rules introduce so many surprises to the
user). People soon learn that // isn't the same as descendant::

David

________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________

• References:
  • XPath brain teaser
    • From: "Roger L. Costello" <costello@m...>
  • Re: XPath brain teaser
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@d...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XPath brain teaser
• Next by Date: RE: A standard approach to glueing together reusableXMLfragments in prose?
• Previous by thread: Re: XPath brain teaser
• Next by thread: Re: XPath brain teaser
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread