Subject: RE: About Constructions rules From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:29:26 -0400 |
Hi Matthias, Your point is well taken. So your point is: a) If we talk about a non pattern matched behavior for a query type construct let's not call it a "query" construction rule. this way, new experimental DSSSL-2 constructs would not be confounded with DSSSL-1 specs objects. Our focus should be on improving OpenJade to be more conform to the specs. Then, would the query construction rule as specified by the specs would be useful to be implemented. Comments? The first suggestion is that it could be useful to pattern match on some non-elements nodes like 1) processing instructions, 2) properties, 3) data (no so sure of this one). the element and PI construction rules are restricted to solely element pattern match. Thus, the query construction rule opens the door to other documents objects being processed. regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: About Constructions rules, Matthias Clasen | Thread | Re: About Constructions rules, Matthias Clasen |
RE: The DSSSList Digest V3 #105, Wroth, Mark | Date | RE: The DSSSList Digest V3 #105, Didier PH Martin |
Month |