Subject: Re: [xsl] Strict sequential identity rule? From: Colin Paul Adams <colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: 22 Sep 2005 05:52:47 +0100 |
>>>>> "Dimitre" == Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> writes: Dimitre> Pardon my bad English, but for me you are also a Dimitre> "vendor", and a "free vendor" :o) of an XSLT processor. Well, it was really only tongue-in-cheek :-) Dimitre> Probably vendors of XSLT processors could provide such Dimitre> facilities? >> The former is easy to do (but should not be on by default, as >> it would annoy too many people). The latter is equally easy, >> but is non-compliant behaviour. So it must be a non-default >> option. In which case, I think the warning is better. The real point of my post was to find out which option you would prefer - a warning, or a suppression. -- Colin Adams Preston Lancashire
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Strict sequential identit, Evan Lenz | Thread | Re: [xsl] Strict sequential identit, andrew welch |
RE: [xsl] Can't use xsl:include hre, UlyLee | Date | Re: [xsl] Unwanted Prefixes in Outp, Alan |
Month |