Subject: Re: [xsl] Things that make you go Hmmmm!|
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 13:13:39 +0000
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I was surprised that the content models of xsl:copy and xsl:copy-of were different (by dint of the select attribute) in the first place.
They are still different, no? shallow vs deep.
On 28 March 2014 17:50, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:I'm not sure what point you are making.
That the content models are still different (not just the select attribute).
The only other difference I see is that xsl:copy has a use-attribute-set attribute and the xsl:copy-of doesn't.
I'd make them the same.
As to my point. For the same reasons I would expect the content models of xsl:next-match, xsl:apply-templates and xsl:apply-imports to be the same.
What would the xsl:sort child of xsl:next-match or xsl:apply-imports do?
What does xsl:value-of a null string do?
What is the advantage of restricting a language constructs content model to the use-cases you can foresee today. What is the disadvantage of doing that?