----- Original Message ----- From: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" <bortzmeyer@xxxxxx> To: "Tom.Petch" <sisyphus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: "ietf" <ietf@xxxxxxxx>; <simple@xxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, September 18, 2007 4:10 PM Subject: Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-simple-xml-patch-ops (An Extensible Markup Language (XML) Patch Operations Framework Utilizing XML Path Language (XPath) Selectors) to Proposed Standard > On Tue, Sep 18, 2007 at 02:19:51PM +0200, > Tom.Petch <sisyphus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote > a message of 135 lines which said: > > > I question the use of XPath 1.0, when XPath 2.0 was approved at the > > start of this year. It seems short-sighted, a bit like choosing IPv4 > > over IPv6 > > I strongly disagree. Xpath 2.0 is *much* more complicated than Xpath > 1.0. Among free software, there is little implementation (or even > plans) of 2.0. Xpath 2.0 is quite controversial. > OK, XPath 2.0 looks more attractive to me as a user but I am not familiar with the uptake of XPath 2.0 (and does this make my point that more IETF-wide guidance could be valuable eg, to set another pack of leverets running, XSD v RELAX NG v ...) > The comparison with IPv4/v6 is wrong. If you start from scratch, IPv6 > is no more complicated than IPv4 (and it is probably the > opposite). Xpath 2.0 is always much more difficult to implement (for > instance, it requires schemas). > > > This business of updating parts of an XML document seems to be > > cropping up in a number of places in the IETF with very different > > solutions. > > AFAIK, this is the first one to be specified at IETF. Other contenders > are: > > * REX (W3C), which uses DOM events http://www.w3.org/TR/rex/ > > * Xquery update (W3C) http://www.w3.org/TR/xqupdate/ > > * XUpdate, which seems completely dead > http://xmldb-org.sourceforge.net/xupdate/ > > * DUL, there was an I-D, "A delta format for XML documents", > draft-mouat-xml-patch-00.txt, now expired > http://sourceforge.net/projects/diffxml > > Two that are current for me NETCONF, which offers XPath or subtree filtering to update configuration information stored in XML, and ForCES which uses a different approach to configure Network Elements specified via XML; I think I have seen others in the Apps area. I am not saying that these are doing exactly the same, rather that I see the same issues with varying results. Tom Petch _______________________________________________ Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf