Subject: Re: [xsl] Initial whitespace in PI from XSLT, main body From: "Dimitre Novatchev dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 8 May 2022 19:22:13 -0000 |
> > Do we want the behavior of almost all current XML processing tools to suddenly become "incompliant"? > > > > Wendell is proposing an application-level house style for use of processing instructions, a rule for the next level up the protocol stack, which is perfectly legitimate. Sorry, this sounds completely not understandable: 1. What is "application-level house style"? 2. What is "a rule for the next level up the protocol stack" ? And why are we dealing at such a level of detail of a relatively simple feature, when there are much more serious issues with some specifications, like being 1100 pages long and probably lacking a single reader who has read them all and has grasped the intended (???) meaning? Thanks, Dimitre On Sun, May 8, 2022 at 12:02 PM Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx < xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Do we want the behavior of almost all current XML processing tools to > suddenly become "incompliant"? > > > > Wendell is proposing an application-level house style for use of > processing instructions, a rule for the next level up the protocol stack, > which is perfectly legitimate. > > In fact I've heard others propose a stronger convention, namely that > processing instructions should use the syntax of attribute="value" pairs, > as in an element start tag: that's the design convention used for the > xml-stylesheet processing instruction. > > Michael Kay > Saxonica
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Initial whitespace in PI , Michael Kay mike@xxx | Thread | Re: [xsl] Initial whitespace in PI , Wendell Piez wapiez@ |
Re: [xsl] Initial whitespace in PI , Michael Kay mike@xxx | Date | Re: [xsl] Initial whitespace in PI , Peter Flynn peter@xx |
Month |