Lists Home |
Date Index |
> I don't doubt that if complex types are eventually elegantly
> incorporated into XPath then we'll use them with as few complaints as
> we do qualified names (which isn't to say none!). But I think that
> Simon's request for an XPath 1.5 is a request for an XPath that meets
> *current* user requirements (by which I mean the requirements that
> have been around for the last two years), within a reasonable
> time-scale, and it seems clear that support for XML Schema structures
> would be one of the first things to drop if that were the goal.
As you know, Jeni, I would personally have preferred to bite off a smaller
problem for the current XPath round. But the time for that was at the
requirements phase, and it's very hard to change course now, when we appear
at last to be making progress towards the goal. Someone is going to have to
do some serious lobbying to get a change in the objectives, it isn't going
to happen as a result of grumbling on this list.