Re: sub-tree filtering proposals

[Wes Hardaker <wjhns1@hardakers.net>]

>>>>> On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 00:45:15 +0200, Juergen Schoenwaelder <j.schoenwaelder@iu-bremen.de> said:

Juergen> You do not want to subset XPATH to reduce the implementation
Juergen> costs and at the same time you propose a different filter
Juergen> mechanism to reduce the implementation cost (which at the end
Juergen> might map to a subset of XPATH).

Juergen has a perfect point here.  You're creating something new,
which will take new code to implement something that doesn't yet exist
because you don't want to use something else which is potentially more
complex but yet code exists for it.  Don't you think it will take
significantly less work for implementations to implement partial XPath
for which there is a plethora of pre-existing code than it will be to
implement (and get right) something entirely new?  The whole point
behind using XML in the first place for this initiative was to make
use of existing tools, but yet for this one you're throwing out the
existing tools and libraries. Seems odd. 

-- 
"In the bathtub of history the truth is harder to hold than the soap,
 and much more difficult to find."  -- Terry Pratchett

--
to unsubscribe send a message to netconf-request@ops.ietf.org with
the word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://ops.ietf.org/lists/netconf/>