[rhdunn]

The HTML "Living Standard" is constantly updated [1-6].

The PNG spec [7] has been updated several times in 1996, 1998, 1999, and 2025.

The XPath spec [8] has multiple versions: 1.0 (1999), 2.0 (2007), 3.0 (2014), and 3.1 (2017), with 4.0 in development.

The RDF spec [9] has multiple versions: 1.0 (2004), and 1.1 (2014). Plus the related specs and their associated versions.

The schema.org metadata standard [10] is under active development and is currently on version 30.

[1] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/... (New)

[2] https://web.dev/baseline/2025 -- popover API, plain text content editable, etc.

[3] https://web.dev/baseline/2024 -- exclusive accordions, declarative shadow root DOM

[4] https://web.dev/baseline/2023 -- inert attribute, lazy loading iframes

[5] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/... (Baseline 2023)

[6] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Reference/... (2020)

[7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNG

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XPath

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resource_Description_Framework

[10] https://schema.org/

[cpill]

please! nobody uses Xpath (coz json killed XML), it RDF (semantic web never happened, and one ever 10years is not fast), schema.org (again, nobody cares), PNG: no change in the last 26 years, not fast. the HTML "living standard" :D completely optional and hence not a standard but definition.

[yusaydat]

Xpath is still used for e2e tests and things like scraping. Especially when there aren't better selectors available.

[thomasmg]

The point is that you don't need the very latest version. The 20 years old version is enough.

[rhdunn]

XPath 1.0 is a pain to write queries for. XPath 2.0 adds features that make it easier to write queries. XPath 3.1 adds support for maps, arrays, and JSON.

And the default Python XPath support is severely limited, not even a full 1.0 implementation. You can't use the Python XPath support to do things like `element[contains(@attribute, 'value')]` so you need to include an external library to implement XPath.

[thomasmg]

The problem of XPath 3.1 is that it is very complex [1] - this is a long page. Compared to the 1.0 spec, it is just too complex in my view. For the open source project I'm working on, I never felt that the "old" XPath version is painful.

I think simplicity is better. That's why Json is used nowadays, and XML is not.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/xpath-31/ [2] https://jackrabbit.apache.org/oak/docs/query/grammar-xpath.h...

[rhdunn]

XPath is used in processing XML (JATS and other publishing/standards XML files) and can be used to proces HTML content.

RDF and the related standards are still used in some areas. If the "Batteries Included" standard library ignores these then those standards will need an external library to support them.

Schema.org is used by Google and other search engines to describe content on the page such as breadcrumbs, publications, paywalled content, cinema screenings, etc. If you are generating websites then you need to produce schema.org metadata to improve the SEO.

Did you notice that a new PNG standard was released in 2025 (last year, with a working draft in 2022) adding support for APNG, HDR, and Exif metadata? Yes, it hasn't changed frequently, but it does change. So if you have PNG support in the standard library you need to update it to support those changes.

And if HTML support is optional then you will need an external library to support it. Hence a "Batteries Included" standard library being incomplete.

[hoppp]

Its used plenty in legacy systems that are still around.