> I can tell this is not going to be a productive conversation, as folks are intent on playing word games to try and pretend Chrome has a different stance than we do. As such, I won't be participating in this thread further. I think I've made our position clear. --user domenic (from Google/Chrome, I presume)
So, a productive conversation is one in which people agree with the position of the Chrome team :-/
No, “we don’t support X because Y”, “Y can be interpreted to mean Z and Z does not conflict with X so surely you actually support X” is not a productive conversation.
That's not an accurate summary of the argument. XPath doesn't need to have any dependencies on the technologies they are trying to deprecate, like the Chrome team member is implying. So when they said "Y" they really did mean "Z", and the difference is relevant to the point.
Even if they did mean Z, "we want to drop this entire thing" to "we want to implement this whole thing and then some from scratch" is quite a leap. Looping back to gp's comment, there's a subtle difference between disagreeing and putting words into someone else's mouth.
So, a productive conversation is one in which people agree with the position of the Chrome team :-/