Subject: RE: [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation) From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 23:38:57 -0000 |
> > On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 09:47:23PM +0100, Tobias Reif wrote: > > Daniel Veillard wrote: > > > The dependancy on W3C XML Schemas makes it very very unlikely for > > > me. > > I agree that dependency on WXS is a bad aspect, but I think > it won't > > be > > required for all implementations. > > First news to me, how can you back-up that statement ? > See http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#conformance Specifically: The XSL Working Group intends to define a conformance level for XSLT processors that do not perform any schema processing. The detailed rules for such a processor have yet to be defined. Michael Kay Software AG home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable, Tobias Reif | Thread | Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, Tobias Reif | Date | RE: [xsl] XPath question, Michael Kay |
Month |