Subject: Re: [xsl] stylesheet organisation From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2011 15:11:12 +0100 |
On 3 September 2011 14:31, Jesper Tverskov <jesper@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I'm sorry that I dropped "as far as I know" from my posting right > before I hit the Send button, but I some times take chances in order > to stir up things that makes it possible for all of us to learn > something. :) You soon learn (or at least commit it to memory) when you answer someone, and then others point out that your answer was wrong... it worked for me anyway. > I still feel that the spec pretty much says what I'm saying, > http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#import, and that most of the differences > are due to the simple fact the xsl.import must be the first child. The main thing to remember with xsl:import is that the order of the imports takes precedence over everything including the priority attribute. If you have: <xsl:import href="foo.xslt"> <xsl:import href="bar.xslt"/> and then someone comes along and changes it to: <xsl:import href="bar.xslt"/> <xsl:import href="foo.xslt"> ...then it can change the output. Changing the priorities of any of the templates won't make any difference... those in foo.xslt will always win - which goes against your idea that it was ultimately just the ordering of the templates underneath. xsl:include can be in any order, it doesn't matter, and priorities still have an effect. -- Andrew Welch http://andrewjwelch.com
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] stylesheet organisation, G. Ken Holman | Thread | Re: [xsl] stylesheet organisation, Alex Muir |
Re: [xsl] stylesheet organisation, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] stylesheet organisation, G. Ken Holman |
Month |