Hi Michael,
   Thanks, for your thoughts.

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 7:19 PM, Michael Glavassevich
<mrglavas@ca.i...> wrote:
> Given that the XDM is only constructed from the current element (without its children), its
> attributes and inherited attributes the issues that I previously mentioned aren't relevant to
> CTA because you can always evaluate the XPath on the startElement().

Yes, that's my understanding as well. This, I think makes using
PsychoPath simpler for CTA.

> With that in mind I think you're proposal to use PsychoPath here is fine,

Thanks :)

> though might be better to always favour our own built-in XPath support (for
> performance reasons) when the expression does fall within the subset and
> only use PsychoPath for expressions that Xerces does not handle natively.

I agree. Therefore, we could make the native XPath 2.0 subset parser a
default for CTA, and we could use PsychoPath for CTA, if a system
property is specified, as I wrote earlier.

I think, in principle you agree, that using PsychoPath as an
additional XPath 2.0 engine, for CTA processing is ok. But, who would
write PsychoPath integration for CTA?

I would be pleased to write this piece of integration :) Any further
suggestions, please?


--
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: j-dev-unsubscribe@xerc...
For additional commands, e-mail: j-dev-help@xerc...