Subject: Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was: Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call-template) From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 12:42:00 -0500 (EST) |
> > > Perhaps xsl:for-each shouldn't be allowed directly within function > > > definitions? Can anyone come up with a use case where it's helpful to > > > have it? > > > > Saxon allows xsl:for-each with saxon:function, but doesn't allow > > saxon:return within xsl:for-each. > > I'd generalize this restriction to say > > "It is an error for more than one exsl:result to be instantiated within the > body of an exsl:function" Is it true that "exsl:return" largely emerged since there was no way to return a specific node as part of a result fragment? I was wondering, what about <exsl:reference-of select="node-set" /> It does introduce a "node reference" data type (perhaps simulated as a string). I guess this doesn't make it 1.0 compatible, however, would this allow "exsl:return" to go away? Clark XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Uche Ogbuji | Thread | Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Jeni Tennison |
Re: [xsl] RE: Designs for XSLT func, Jeni Tennison | Date | [xsl] Getting the Date, Mark Swardstrom |
Month |