Subject: Re: Formal parameters for stylesheets From: Paul Prescod <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 03 Feb 1999 03:36:38 -0600 |
Jason Diamond wrote: > > A processor could actually support parameters without changing the spec. If a > user did something like this on the command line: > > xt -Dfoo=bar test.xml test.xsl Paul Prescod wrote: > The only one that is not gross is overriding the value of a variable from > outside. The problem with that mechanism is that there is no way that a > GUI or command line tool can know which variables are supposed to be > overriden and which ones are not. They just must "trust the user." It also > means that a GUI cannot *prompt* for the appropriate paramaters. I should have said "constant" instead of "variable" but otherwise I think that this paragraph addresses your proposal. Maybe not: one could interpret what you said as "any constants that are referred to but not defined are implicitly formal parameters." I could buy this but I think the spec. would have to be changed to say that it is legal to refer to parameters that are not defined. I would rather if there was just a first-class parameter feature. Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco "Remember, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did, but she did it backwards and in high heels." --Faith Whittlesey XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Formal parameters for styleshee, Jason Diamond | Thread | Fw: Formal parameters for styleshee, Oren Ben-Kiki |
Re: SGML output from XSL?, Paul Prescod | Date | Re: Expanding QNames in ElementExpr, James Clark |
Month |