Subject: Re: Microsoft extensions to XSL (was RE: how to call Javascript function in .xsl file) function in .xsl file) From: "Denis Hennessy" <denis@xxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 10:21:32 -0000 |
>"Vun Kannon, David" wrote: >> >> Indeed, it would seem that this is a golden opportunity to put >> namespaces to good use. I'm fine with the addition of <eval>, as long as it >> is <ms:eval>, not <xsl:eval>. > >Clearly, Microsoft intends for these features to become part of standard >XSL. After all, changing the namespace doesn't solve the fundamental >problem: stylesheets that use the feature work exclusively with >Microsoft's processor. That's Double-Plus Ungood. For my work, the dropping of script support in the current draft has been a major pain. If Microsoft's processor is the only one that supports scripting, then the platform decision is clear. I don't care whether the tag is called <ms:eval> or <xsl:eval>; the functionality is needed for a great many applications and if the standard doesn't provide it, then proprietary extensions must. /dh XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Pawson, David | Thread | Re: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Chris Maden |
Re: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Henry S. Thompson | Date | RE: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Pawson, David |
Month |