Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 12:00:20 -0000 |
> Adam Van Den Hoven wrote: > > > If I write a document that I can say is 100% XSLT > > compliant, then I demand that when I use that document in a > processor that > > is 100% compliant the resulting output is exactly as I have > specified. > James Clark replied: > This is not the case in XSLT 1.0. For example: > I would add to what James said, a reminder that XSLT 1.0 does not define any notion of a stylesheet being "100% XSLT compliant". There are things that are correct and whose behavior is fully defined; there are things that are correct whose behavior is only partially defined (eg.. alphabetic sorting); there are things that are correct that the processor is allowed to ignore (e.g. xsl:output); there are things that are errors that the processor is obliged to signal; and there are things that are errors where the processor is allowed to implemented a defined recovery action. I can imagine a definition of stylesheet compliance (portability would be a better word) that restricts the stylesheet to use only things in the first category, but at present no such definition exists. 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, Tobias Reif |
Re: [xsl] XPath over DOM, Alexey Gokhberg | Date | [xsl] To pass parameters to functio, nmartella |
Month |