Subject: Re: [xsl] MSXML / NBSP problem and resolution From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2002 10:39:47 GMT |
> Everything that comes under serialization is a "should" because > serialization itself is optional. yes i understand why html output method is optional, I'm just not sure that it couldn't be more specified in teh cases that teh ssystem choses to support it. > My own view (and the way that XSLT 2.0 may go) is that serialization > should be an optional conformance module, and that most of the things > within it should then be "must"s. sounds good to me. > XSLT 2.0 already has an option to switch off the generation of the > <META> element, on the grounds that users may prefer to do it > themselves. users may say they prefer it, but will they get it right:-) David _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered through the MessageLabs Virus Scanning Service. For further information visit http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp or alternatively call Star Internet for details on the Virus Scanning Service. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] MSXML / NBSP problem and , Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] MSXML / NBSP problem and , Mike Brown |
RE: [xsl] MSXML / NBSP problem and , Michael Kay | Date | [xsl] mixing two XMLs, Felix Garcia |
Month |