Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 15:37:57 -0000 |
> > > Agreed. Anyone interested in doing a "lint" style > > transform for checking > > > transform portability? > > > > Is there really anything other than don't use > > extension functions and > > try not to use disable-output-encoding? Trouble is, some of these features are not statically detectable. For example you could say that roman numbering produces results that are largely undefined, but it's only likely to be problematic for numbers above 1000. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Tobias Reif | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Kaganovich, Yevgeniy |
Re: [xsl] format-number underspecif, David_Marston | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments -Exampl, Uche Ogbuji |
Month |