|
Subject: Re: How is this part of the XSLT specification to be interpreted? From: Bart Schuller <schuller+xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2000 20:10:10 +0200 |
On Wed, Jun 21, 2000 at 06:33:49PM +0100, Jeni Tennison wrote: > as the design pattern for including documentation instead. In a previous > email, I've pointed out that this probably isn't a good idea just in case > some XSLT processor comes along that *does* understand the 'doc:template' > extension element, because then the content of the xsl:fallback element > (which is the content of the template) will not be processed, and your > legacy stylesheet won't work. That seems extremely unlikely, because that processor would have to act not on the literal string 'doc:template' but on the http://doc.com namespace, which in reality would be something more like http://smop.org/xslt/documentation. I promise not to have any XSLT processor interpret that, and the rest of the world has no claim on my domain :-) -- The idea is that the first face shown to people is one they can readily accept - a more traditional logo. The lunacy element is only revealed subsequently, via the LunaDude. [excerpted from the Lunatech Identity Manual] 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, Jeni Tennison | Thread | Re: How is this part of the XSLT sp, Jeni Tennison |
| Machine-readable comments (Was: How, David_Marston | Date | xsl script, zze-wokup balr001 |
| Month |