Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: Re: The Perils of Sudden Type-Safety in XPath 2.0 From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 03:26:34 -0800 (PST) |
> >2. What I find ridiculous is not the "new world of XML Schema-typed > >documents ", but a functional language that will allow the following: > ><xsl:variable name="x" select="0"/> > ><xsl:for-each ... > > <xsl:variable name="x" select="$x + 1"/> > >The above does seem messy. > > >or > > > ><xsl:variable name="x" select="0"/> > ><xsl:variable name="x" select="3"/> > > <xsl:variable name="x" select="$x + 2"/> > > can you point me to the part in the spec where that is allowed? If > that's right I'm gonna have to take the day off to go indulge in heavy > drugs. http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#d5e7759 The WD Spec contains the first of the above examples. The second was added by me, because it is perfectly legal now, according to the current WD Spec. > >"Thus, the following is not an error, but is discouraged, because the > >effect > >is probably not what was intended. " ? > > This sounds like a stylistic manuals warning against indulging in > slang, because the meaning conveyed is often not the meaning > intended. Does xslt 2.0 allow slang?! > Will great xslt users be able to use these facilities of the new > language because of a sort of poetic license available to them? Like you, I hope that somebody will care to answer these questions. ===== Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev. http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Re: Re: The Perils of Sud, Kurt Cagle | Thread | RE: [xsl] Re: Re: The Perils of Sud, bryan |
Re: [xsl] OMR Mark for folding mach, Pankaj Shinde | Date | Re: [xsl] OMR Mark for folding mach, Oleg Tkachenko |
Month |