relationship to XPath 2.0

Raised by:
Paul Downey
Opened on:
We define our patterns using XPath 2.0 expressions, so a normative reference to
the XPath 2.0 specification seems natural. However XPath 2.0 is currently in CR.
We can reference documents one-step behind, so this wont be an obsticle until we
want to move from PR to Rec.
Related emails:
  1. ISSUE-72: relationship to XPath 2.0 (from on 2006-10-09)
  2. Minutes: XML Schema Patterns for Databinding Telcon 10 October 2006 (from on 2006-10-10)
  3. ACTION-80: review ISSUES list against the edtodo list (from on 2006-10-12)
  4. Minutes: XML Schema Patterns for Databinding Telcon 17 October 2006 (from on 2006-10-18)

Related notes:

2006-10-10: closed with proposal from Yves, we're OK to go to Rec with XPath 2.0 in CR, and we should document support for XPath 2.0 is not a requirement for conformance.