I'm probably missing something, but XPath 2.0 doesn't strike me as trivially Turing complete. Loops are bounded (either over range expressions or a set of nodes) and it can't define functions, so it doesn't have recursion, so evaluating any XPath 2.0 expression always halts, so XPath 2.0 can't be Turing complete.

You don't need Turing completeness to mine.

>> Keep XPath 1.0.

But let's backport a few features from v2 and call it v1.1 it'll be just like all the OpenGL versions.

The non-garbage parts of XPath 2.0 are in the additional expanded function library, which largely come from exslt.

You don't really need to change the version because the language itself doesn't change.

I do think having a query language with its own for and if semantics in it would be adding unnecessary complexity to the browser tech stack - but hey - imagine the big bucks I could be pulling in as a consultant if recruiters started having to get guys with 10+ years experience with XPath 2.0 and JavaScript!

Won't someone please think of my financial needs!