RE: [xsl] Is there a reason for not using XSLT 2.0 as a default

Subject: RE: [xsl] Is there a reason for not using XSLT 2.0 as a default
From: "Pawson, David" <David.Pawson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:45:51 -0000
    From: Michael Kay 
    You've had several responses with different views on the 
    probability of failure, but to make a decision you need to 
    assess the other two variables, and it's unlikely that 
    anyone but you can do that.
    I think we're starting to see one risk disappear, namely 
    the risk of being locked into a single supplier. There are 
    now three XSLT 2.0 processors released, and I'm sure we'll 
    see others in the next few months. (I have no idea, of 
    course, what quality they will be.)

Confused Michael. Yours, Colins and .....?

Whose is the third please?

regards DaveP


NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged.  If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system.

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants.  However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such 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


Current Thread