Re: [XPath Filter 2.0] Problem with Transform model

On Wednesday 29 May 2002 01:55 pm, John Boyer wrote:
> In conclusion, this means that if an empty node-set is given as input to
> an Xpath 2.0 filter, returning an empty node-set would be behavior
> consistent with the XPath 1.0 recommendation and with the XPath filter
> 1.0 in the XML DSig recommendation.  To throw an error would be
> inconsistent.

Yes, I prefer this and its what I meant when I said, "We could add a 
processing step that says if the input node-set is empty the transform is 
done." [1] I changed it to the error [2] because I feared I was alone, but 
now that you've clarified it further perhaps Gregor and Merlin might agree 
too? <smile/>


[1] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2002AprJun/0216.html
[2] 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-ietf-xmldsig/2002AprJun/0218.html