Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:12:57 GMT |
> I recognise my need (in 3 places) for saxon:line-number() and > would support its addition to the base language as a case in point. ah, so that's the criterion, only extensions that you've used should be let in:-) > Its the idea of any non xsl vocab inside my stylesheet that I > object to. I don't really think there is much special about the distinction of being in the same file. If it's some script inside an msxml:script element or an extension function accessed via a java: URI pointing at some class that is hopefully on my java classpath, the effect is the same: it will either work or it won't depending on circumstances. So I don't see stylesheets using msxml:script as any less portable than an xsl 1.0 stylesheet using the XSL engine's current java binding to an extension function. David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, DPawson | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Steve Muench |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments (node e, Francis Norton | Date | RE: [xsl] xsl:include blues.., Kevin Duffey |
Month |