This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
namespace for xxx:script (was: XSLT 1.1 comments)
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: namespace for xxx:script (was: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments)
- From: David Carlisle <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 13:13:42 GMT
- References: <9B66BBD37D5DD411B8CE00508B69700F4F01FC@pborolocal.rnib.org.uk>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
I said
> If instead it was a top level element in the XSl namespace that was
> allowed to be ignored, I don't see how you would be worse off,
If there were a standardised namespace for extension elements and
functions, an alternative would be to put xxx:script into that.
<xslx:script xmlns:xslx="...">... whatever
That would mean that it would automatically be ignored by default
according to XSLT 1.0 rules, and would be a stronger indication
to implementors that they needn't support this, in particular they could
still claim "full conformance" to XSLT without doing anything with
this element at all.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list