This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: XSLT 1.1 comments
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments
- From: DPawson at rnib dot org dot uk
- Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 16:48:53 -0000
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
David Carlisle
> ah, so that's the criterion, only extensions that you've used
> should be
> let in:-)
I can only put forward my own views David.
>
> > Its the idea of any non xsl vocab inside my stylesheet that I
> > object to.
>
> I don't really think there is much special about the distinction of
> being in the same file. If it's some script inside an msxml:script
> element or an extension function accessed via a java: URI pointing at
> some class that is hopefully on my java classpath, the effect is the
> same: it will either work or it won't depending on circumstances.
> So I don't see stylesheets using msxml:script as any less
> portable than
> an xsl 1.0 stylesheet using the XSL engine's current java binding to
> an extension function.
Agreed. I said I make use of saxon:line-number() at my own risk.
Just as we both do for yyy:node-set()
Some risks we accept.
Regards DaveP
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list