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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help



   Re: [xml-dev] Changing XPath 1.0 Semantics in XForms 1.0?

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

In a message dated 13/11/2002 19:21:12 GMT Standard Time, MDubinko@cardiff.com writes:


You seem to be making a fairly common mistake.

XPath expression are not evaluated against "documents", but rather against
an XPath data model. In many cases, the XPath data model is isomorphic with
an entire XML document, but nowhere is this required.

It's up to any specification that uses XPath to define the data model and
context against which XPath expressions are evaluated. How else could it
possibly work?


-----Original Message-----
From: AndrewWatt2000@aol.com [mailto:AndrewWatt2000@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:57 AM
To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
Subject: [xml-dev] Changing XPath 1.0 Semantics in XForms 1.0?

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
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
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


I was hoping that some of the bright guys on the list could come at this with a fresh pair of eyes. ... Typically, this isn't a list of shy individuals. :) .... I assume that you have already looked at this issue and made up your mind. :)

Let me fill in the time until some other responses arrive by asking you how many "root nodes" an XForms processor would see in, or associated with, a multinamespace XML document which contains three <xforms:model> elements.

For each of those root nodes which an XForms processor sees (I assume that you will suggest there are three), can you provide the element type (name) of the document element node which is the child node of the root node?

Can you also specify how many root nodes a non-XForms processor would see in the same document and whether that root node / those root nodes would or would not be the same root node(s) that the XForms processor sees?

Clear answers to those questions would help me better to understand your mode of thought on this issue.


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