Subject: RE: [xsl]l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" version 2 proposal. From: DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2001 08:29:41 +0100 |
Considering the number of questions this raises, How many rules would be broken if were added to an XSLT engine? I.e. put in as part of the rec? Regards DaveP *****snip here********* - NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your system. RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments. Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RNIB. RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227 Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Generic template for sele, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl]l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" ver, Rafael 'Dido' Sevill |
RE: [xsl] How do you prevent ', Julian Reschke | Date | Re: [xsl]l "& #xA0; vs & #160;" ver, Rafael 'Dido' Sevill |
Month |