Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call-template

Subject: Re: [xsl] RE: syntax sugar for call-template
From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 12:43:45 -0500 (EST)
On Sat, 17 Feb 2001, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> <xsl:template name="foo">
>    <bar>
>       <xsl:return select="'bar'" />
>    </bar>
> </xsl:template>

I must say that I really do not like the "return" idea.

The output of the template is the result-fragment it
generates.  If one wanted to call templates from XPath,
then, one could have the result-fragment returned as a node-set.  
Simple.  All of this "return" stuff gives me a headache,
why is it necessary?  If a <xsl:return> is necessary (evidence 
please), then I vote for Kay's <xsl:function>.  The *worst*
case is having both an output fragment _and_ a return statement.
This combination makes no sense whatsoever.



 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread