Message303403
| Author | scoder |
|---|---|
| Recipients | eli.bendersky, scoder, serhiy.storchaka |
| Date | 2017-09-30.09:03:24 |
| SpamBayes Score | -1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified | Yes |
| Message-id | <1506762204.8.0.213398074469.issue31648@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content | |
|---|---|
Well, there's XPath for a standard: https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath/ ElementPath deviates from it in its namespace syntax (it allows "{ns}tag" where XPath requires "p:tag" prefixes), but that's about it. All other differences are basically needless limitations of ElementPath. In fact, I had noticed these two limitations in lxml, so I implemented them for the next release. And since ElementPath in ElementTree is still mostly the same as ElementPath in lxml, here's the same thing for ET. |
|
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2017-09-30 09:03:24 | scoder | set | recipients: + scoder, eli.bendersky, serhiy.storchaka |
| 2017-09-30 09:03:24 | scoder | set | messageid: <1506762204.8.0.213398074469.issue31648@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2017-09-30 09:03:24 | scoder | link | issue31648 messages |
| 2017-09-30 09:03:24 | scoder | create | |