Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 validation -- how to? From: "Pawson, David" <David.Pawson@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 10:49:12 +0100 |
-----Original Message----- From: Michael Kay I think XSLT 1.0 did a pretty good job of providing basic capabilities for versioning. One wouldn't expect many people to be using them when there is only one version of the spec out. It might turn out that it was over-engineered, but that's probably better than the opposite. Agreed from a 1.0 perspective. You also said, "I'm less convinced by finer-grained controls. If it hadn't already been there (on LREs) in 1.0, I doubt we would have added it." Is it still a worthwhile addition in 2.0? regards DaveP -- DISCLAIMER: NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it and any attachments from your system. RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants. However, it cannot accept any responsibility for any such which are transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RNIB. RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, David Carlisle |
RE: [xsl] XPath Problem - selecting, Jarno.Elovirta | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 *and* XSLT 1.0 v, David Carlisle |
Month |