Subject: RE: [xsl] An (almost) identity stylesheet From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 13:07:56 +0100 |
>why was that choice made? It was considered unreasonable to require an XSLT 2.0 processor to know about and enforce all the XSLT 1.0 rules as well as the XSLT 2.0 rules. This would have to include semantic differences (e.g. the distinction between RTFs and nodesets) as well as syntactic restrictions, which could seriously distort an implementation. Also, it doesn't help migration. Users want to move forwards to take advantage of new features, while still getting backwards compatibility mode for their existing code. If they just want a pure XSLT 1.0 processor, they can use one. (That's a justification of the choice, not a historical account of WG deliberations. As a historical question, explaining why a WG made a particular decision is never easy.) Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] An (almost) identity styl, John Snelson | Thread | RE: [xsl] An (almost) identity styl, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] An (almost) identity styl, John Snelson | Date | RE: [xsl] An (almost) identity styl, Michael Kay |
Month |