OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Changing XPath 1.0 Semantics in XForms 1.0?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

I would be interested in the perspective of list members on an issue which 
has arisen in relation to the newly issued XForms 1.0 CR.

It seems to me that a change is being made in XForms 1.0 to XPath 1.0 
absolute location path semantics and that that may not be a good idea.

is my original post on the topic. There are a couple of responses.

I guess my concern is twofold.

One is it a good idea to vary the semantics of XPath 1.0 absolute location 
paths in XForms 1.0?

Secondly, in a world where multinamespace documents will become the norm what 
should be the "scope" (for want of a better term) within a multinamespace 
document for any particular processor? Should, say, an XForms processor only 
see the "XForms bits" for want of a better term or is that a potentially 
confusing change to what a document is, what a root node is etc?

As far as the specifics of the XForms 1.0 issue go, it seems to me that there 
are two possible solutions. One is that the claim to being "XPath 1.0" 
location paths is removed. The other is that some amendment to absolute 
location paths which is (more?) applicable to multinamespace documents is 

Andrew Watt


News | XML in Industry | Calendar | XML Registry
Marketplace | Resources | MyXML.org | Sponsors | Privacy Statement

Copyright 2001 XML.org. This site is hosted by OASIS