This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: Re: FXPath - A comment on EXSL
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: RE: [xsl] Re: FXPath - A comment on EXSL
- From: DPawson at rnib dot org dot uk
- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 16:00:20 -0000
- Cc: mail at jenitennison dot com
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
The main approach was that since the whole function
should be implemented in FXPath, why stuff it inside an attribute
just for the sake of it? As I see it, it has two positive effects not
putting it inside and attribute: there is less risk for string quote
conflicts
and you can add inline comments. However, these arguments are not
strong, and if it appears important for consistency that a FXPath lives
inside an attribute value then we can put it there.
the above was one of my first questions when I came to XSLT.
Why is 'the useful stuff' all inside attributes?
With DSSSL I can 'validate' the stylesheet using a scheme system.
With XSLT I can 'mostly' validate the stylesheet using a parser.
If we are going to lose xml validity, I'd like it to be replaced
with something as good as/ better.
<voice type="tiny">I'd settle for scheme</voice>
Regards DaveP
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list