RE: [xsl] Required cardinality checks

Subject: RE: [xsl] Required cardinality checks
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 07:22:52 +0100
> This makes sense, but there are some less obvious cases where 
> it is still not clear how the above would apply. 

Indeed. As I say, there has been a great deal of debate about exactly what
is and is not allowed under these rules. The specification for error
handling in the face of optimization is informal and leaves a lot to the
good sense of implementors. Don't expect all implementations to behave the
same way.


Michael Kay 

Current Thread