+0 I agree that CSS should be preferred for HTML and, in general, I'm in favour of removing seldom used/broken bits of functionality which don't warrant the cost of keeping them around, but I don't know enough about it nor how often XPath is currently used by people to say +1 for this yet.
Maybe worth deprecating it and emailing the user mailing list to see the reaction? Graham On 16 November 2017 at 19:20, Philippe Mouawad <philippe.moua...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > Tidy option AFAIK used to allow using XPath Extractor for HTML. > I don't think it's needed anymore since we have CSS/JQuery extractor which > is: > - Up to date > - Powerful > - Performing much better than XPath > > I propose to drop tidy options from XPath. > I even propose to think about dropping jtidy library which would mean : > > - Either Dropping AnchorModifier or finding a better alternative to > jtidy to it if it's useful > > IMO, we should drop it, as it doesn't work with Distributed testing as it > requires keeping the previous SampleResult response Data to be able to work > which Stripping mode clears. > > -- > Cordialement. > Philippe Mouawad.
