Subject: RE: [xsl] Quasi-Literals and XML From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 16:35:16 -0000 |
> My point is that in the first place the statement that XSL is not > Turing-complete is debatable It's not debatable, it's a lie, thanks for drawing it to our attention. But presumably xmlhack isn't a peer-reviewed journal, so anyone with a product to peddle can say what they like. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Quasi-Literals and XML, Linda van den Brink | Thread | Re: [xsl] Quasi-Literals and XML, Eric van der Vlist |
Re: [xsl] recursion questions, by way of B. Tommie | Date | RE: [xsl] Removing Nulls, Michael Kay |
Month |