Subject: RE: [xsl] PI for associating a sample input with a stylesheet [was Re: [xsl] Xselerator] From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2007 16:03:56 +0100 |
> I am curious how much interest is in having such a PI. I > remember that I was pro having a PI to associate a Relax NG > schema with an XML document and there was a strong reaction > against making a proposal for such a PI on the Relax NG list. > So what people think about such a PI? I think the problem is that a PI is an "instruction", it is imperative. I don't believe that a document should contain instructions that say how it is to be processed. That belongs elsewhere, in a task or workload or script or scenario... However, I think there's room for assertions. It's reasonable for an instance document to contain an assertion that it conforms to a particular schema. That implies multiple such assertions should be allowed. It's also reasonable for a stylesheet to contain assertions about the types of its input and output. But in an IDE used for XML/XSLT transformations, I would like to be able to select from a list of tasks of the form (transform X using Y with parameters P and processor Z) where there are no restrictions on having the same X or Y in as many tasks as you like. I certainly don't like having the IDE modify my source document when I run such a task. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] PI for associating a samp, Florent Georges | Thread | RE: [xsl] PI for associating a samp, Abel Braaksma (onlin |
Re: [xsl] PI for associating a samp, Abel Braaksma (onlin | Date | Re: [xsl] [xslt 2.0] Difference bet, Abel Braaksma (onlin |
Month |