Subject: Re: [xsl] v4 mode From: "Graydon graydon@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 11:02:19 -0000 |
On Fri, Jan 24, 2025 at 10:32:21AM -0000, Andre Cusson akhu01@xxxxxxxxx scripsit: > Yet, could/should functions feasibly be mode-scoped (or even mode-scoped & > mode-sensitive ;)? Under what circumstances would we want a built-in funtion (necessarily statically provided with a mode, presumably one of #all, #default, or #unnamed) not work sometimes? -- Graydon -- Graydon Saunders | graydonish@xxxxxxxxxxxx \xDE\xE6s ofer\xE9ode, \xF0isses sw\xE1 m\xE6g. -- Deor ("That passed, so may this.")
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] v4 mode, Michael Kay michaelk | Thread | Re: [xsl] v4 mode, Michael Kay michaelk |
Re: [xsl] v4 mode, Michael Kay michaelk | Date | Re: [xsl] v4 mode, Michael Kay michaelk |
Month |