Hi all,
[After a morning of meeting, back online ... :-) ]
Yes, I agree with Ron.
We may not want to overload expression, like $var/a/b/c, as the
assignment target.
I tend to believe that we still want to:
(1) keep both expression and query in from-spec
(2) keep query in to-spec
(3) allow the usage of $var in expression
Danny ... if we pass issue 11 (assume we go for insertBefore and
appendChild), the to-spec for insertBefore and appendChild will be the
same. The only change is: expression in from-spec now can use $var
E.g.:
<appendChild>
<from expression="$fooVar/abc/def" />
<to variable="barVar" query="/ghi/jkl" />
</appendChild>
the expression would be appended as as the last child under "/ghi/jkl".
And, "/ghi/jkl" are existing nodes.
IMHO, XPath location path used in query or expression will always point
to existing nodes, even after / if Issue 11 is passed.
Thanks!
Regards,
Alex yiu
Ron Ten-Hove wrote:
> Danny van der Rijn wrote:
>
>> maybe i just don't know XPATH well enough, but if $var/a/b/c doesn't
>> exist,
>> can it be the target of an assign?
>>
>>
>>
> XPath 1.0 expressions turn into node-sets, booleans, numbers, or
> strings (and do so without side effects). They don't turn into
> positional references. $var/a/b/c doesn't make sense as the target of
> an <assign> activity, from the XPath point of view.
>
> -Ron
>
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster
> of the OASIS TC), go to
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsbpel/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>
