Subject: Re: Template Rule Conflict Resolution From: Tyler Baker <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1998 12:15:18 -0500 |
Paul Spencer wrote: > Can anyone here throw any light on why the specificity section of > conflict resolution (2.5.1) has been removed and whether it is likely to > return in any form? I think it makes much more sense to specify priority manually now when designing the stylesheets since the pattern matching facilities no longer use qualifiers, but can instead contain OrExpressions with nested expressions inside each BooleanGroupExpression. In the new draft counting boolean expressions and their nested boolean expressions as pattern components I think just no longer makes sense. Also in the old draft, specificity was considered before priority which I think was a mistake. I think that priority should of been considered first. If specificity is added back into the draft for some reason, I think that in Template Conflict Rule Resolution, priority should have a greater weight than specificity. Tyler XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Template Rule Conflict Resolution, Paul Spencer | Thread | |
Template Rule Conflict Resolution, Paul Spencer | Date | Re: Questions on the new XSL spec (, Steve Dahl |
Month |