[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- To: XML Dev ML <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Subject: Re: [xml-dev] xml syntax for xpath
- From: Tatu Saloranta <cowtowncoder@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 12:03:56 -0700 (PDT)
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZM8Fdy8KloxlF1ArnexgTtm/hT9EOdOJN7P1gYdu+4j8nKyzFfMFgRiXIynJ5OzuxwmWikAE9by3FyO2ua8Apa2LCtKtd5mX9gWcrH7Y/5/XEYT5fUdf6tGH7U0+S0lS8HHQLbX/TIiZ62FW333l2ceC/B8dzMpKYpmcrJjaMvY= ;
- In-reply-to: <3bb44c6e0606210513h5b2d671ehf59fd46cf5a40e9a@mail.gmail.com>
--- bryan rasmussen <rasmussen.bryan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, there have been various xml based syntaxes for
> Xpath over the
> year. Anyone have some pointers to these, I am
> basically hoping to
> store extremely complicated/long xpath expressions
> and don't see a
> reason to roll my own (other than IIRC the xml based
> syntaxes were not
> pretty).
... but wont XML-defined representations be, almost by
definition, even longer and more complicated? ;-D
*duck*
But seriously, are you planning to query these paths
using xquery; for storage it'd seem that xpath syntax
itself, stored as text (within xml or whatever) would
not be that bad a storage choice?
-+ Tatu +-
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
|
