Subject: Re: [xsl] James Clark on Schema From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2002 10:28:14 +0100 |
> So we have to define how the XPath processor will > behave when it encounters those types. Not necessarily. This could all have been pushed down into the input tree building process (like CDATA sections or entity references which some parsers will natively flag but XPath steadfastly ignores). > namely a built-in constructor, but this is quite likely to change. Good:-) > I agree that the rules for complex type matching at present seem awfully > complicated, all this agreement, it spoils a good argument. David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] James Clark on Schema, Michael Kay | Thread | [xsl] Why XSLT?, Ranjith Kodikara |
[xsl] <oXygen/> XML Editor 1.1.9, Mihai Ionescu | Date | Re: [xsl] passing params to xslt-sh, Joerg Heinicke |
Month |