Subject: Re: vendor neutral XSL extension namespace ? From: Paul Prescod <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 10 Nov 1999 14:58:05 -0600 |
James Clark wrote: > > I think this is much more along the right lines, but it's not clear to > me how name clashes would be managed. Suppose one vendor wants a "group" > extension element that works a bit like xsl:for-each, and another vendor > wants a "group" extension element that works a bit like xsl:sort. Or > suppose one vendor wants an "intersection" extension function that > accepts 2 arguments, and another vendor wants an "intersection" > extension function that accepts an arbitrary number of arguments. I would say, first come, first serve. If you get stuck with "intersection_2", that's tough luck. If you want perfect control over naming, you need to use a proprietary namespace. Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for himself "Chaos is the Engine" - Len Bullard XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: vendor neutral XSL extension na, Tony Graham | Thread | Re: vendor neutral XSL extension na, David Carlisle |
RE: Sorting and position, Patrick Cauldwell | Date | Re: indentation, Chuck White |
Month |