[dsdl-discuss] Selection criteira

Was previously misnamed:
Subject: [dsdl-discuss] Re: SC34 WG1 Amsterdam - Lack of Agenda

It has been renamed for consistency and to reduce the traffic on the
convenors, etc.

> On Tue, 2004-04-06 at 09:43, Martin Bryan wrote:
> > Eric
> >
> > > > Until we are able of offer a full level of functionality we need to
> > > > remain flexible. Personally I think that there are functions in
XPath
> > 2.0
> > > > that are vital for validation.
> > >
> > > Which ones?
> >
> > Among the many, range, intersect and except. I think the ForClause might
> > also be beneficial in places and would love to be able to use quantified
> > expressions for selection of candidates.
>
> Do you mean that part 4 should support these features?
>
> Which other parts would be affected (in addition of part 3 which AFAIK
> will have provisions for supporting XPath 2.0 as one of its hosting
> languages)?
>
> Note that a full support of XPath 2.0 raises the bar pretty high and
> would mean both supporting W3C XML Schema and forbidding streamable
> implementations.
>
> That's a decision which should be taken very cautiously IMO.

I'm willing to consider what would make an ideal "Streamable XPath 2.0"
though I'm far from convinced that being streamable is a necessary condition
for validation. Pipelining processes does not require that they be streamed.
I consider pipelines vital, and how they are implemented irrelevant. And
yes, DSDL not only needs to set the bar high, it needs to provide the
springs to help people jump the bar. If users can't clear the hurdles they
already face then we have failed. If this means we need ot support the full
functionality of XML Schemas (if not their diabolical syntax) in some future
part of the standard so be it.

Martin

--
DSDL members discussion list
To unsubscribe, please send a message with the
command  "unsubscribe" to dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org
(mailto:dsdl-discuss-request@dsdl.org?Subject=unsubscribe)