Re: xpath processing brain dead

From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
To: Hannu Krosing <hannu(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Nikolay Samokhvalov <samokhvalov(at)gmail(dot)com>
Subject: Re: xpath processing brain dead
Date: 2009-03-02 13:25:34
Message-ID: 49ABDE4E.8080501@gmx.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hannu Krosing wrote:
> Is it just that in you _can't_ use Xpath on fragments, and you _need_ to
> pass full documents to Xpath ?
>
> At least this is my reading of Xpath standard.

It is easy to read the XPath standard that way, because the concept of
fragments is not defined outside of SQL/XML, and is therefore unknown to
the XPath standard. The question at hand is rather whether we can
usefully adapt it.

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Dunstan 2009-03-02 13:38:13 Re: xpath processing brain dead
Previous Message Hannu Krosing 2009-03-02 13:15:03 Re: xpath processing brain dead