Subject: Re: How is this part of the XSLT specification to be interpreted? From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 19:02:39 +0100 (BST) |
> A good point, but in the context of documentation generation the > author has control over the parser and processor, so this isn't > a problem. I don't think the idea is to give the stylesheet to > someone, and tell them to extract the documentation, apply this > other stylesheet. In the absence of widespread support for extension > elements and fallback elements, as David C has proposed, my solution > still seems quite attractive, albeit amoral. And of course whichever documentation markup method you use, it's good to see that the "auto document" feature of this list seems to have been re-enabled. For newcomers, this was a feature where I (or I suppose anyone) would post half working, undocumented code to the list and it would magically be reposted with corrections and documentation added. The auto-documenting service seems to have moved from Canada to Nottingham but otherwise works in the same way as before:-) David XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: How is this part of the XSLT sp, Warren Hedley | Thread | XSL Question, Victor Rodriguez |
Re: How is this part of the XSLT sp, Warren Hedley | Date | Machine-readable comments (Was: How, David_Marston |
Month |