Re: sub-tree filtering proposals

[ned.freed@mrochek.com]

> On Tue, Jun 08, 2004 at 09:04:32AM -0700, Steve Berl wrote:

> > Does it bother anyone else that the 1 filter expression is actually
> > doing 2 things?
> >
> > First, it identifies the root of a tree of XML elements in the document
> > and second it tells which subelements of those elements are to be returned.
> > Aren't these 2 distinct functions that should better be represented by 2
> > separate expressions?

> An XPATH expression always identifies a nodeset (in XML speak) and the
> examples I showed are AFAIK valid XPATH expressions. You can match
> against element names, element contents and attribute contents with the
> restricted subset I have proposed. Full XPATH allows you to do much more
> fancy selection of nodesets. But at the end, it all boils down to
> selecting nodeset when using XPATH, so I fail to understand your
> concern.

Just a guess, but perhaps the idea is to do this the same way xs:keyref
and xs:unique work in XML schema, that is, there's both an xs:selector
and an xs:field XPath. I've never found the field/selector split
to be particularly useful myself, but YMMV.

				Ned



--
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/>