Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >Michael Hartle wrote: > >>I guess XUpdate is depending on input as almost every other process of >>standardization; what about actively participating on the evolution of >>XUpdate instead of distant, probably unheard evaluation ? I think that >>Stefanos view should be pointed out to the spec maintainers of XUpdate, >>in order to try spark discussions and enhancements on the side of XUpdate. >> >Really? > >In case it wasn't clear my comments on XUpdate are: totally useless and >dangerous, there is no need for such a language. >
As I read <quote> > Net result: as it stands right now, I would avoid it as the plague. > > With proper namespace support, better use of attribute-based semantics > and no variables, it would be "decent". > > I'll try to come up with something because, as it stands, I would be > very -1 in basing Cocoon XML persistant capabilities on such a spec. </quote> in your first post, I understood that as if XUpdate wasn't a completely lost cause, but needed some guidance. Well, if Lexus is dead and XML:DB on the way under the Apache umbrella, this looks like an alternative. :-) Best regards, Michael Hartle --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
