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: James Clark <jjc at jclark dot com>
- Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:39:11 +0700
- References: <00BB1956AE40D411B5B60050DA27311F3C608C@MAIL>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Adam Van Den Hoven wrote:
> If I write a document that I can say is 100% XSLT
> compliant, then I demand that when I use that document in a processor that
> is 100% compliant the resulting output is exactly as I have specified.
This is not the case in XSLT 1.0. For example:
- Stylesheets that use extensions (whether extension functions or
extension elements) are 100% XSLT compliant, but there is not guarantee
that a processor will be able to handle them.
- XSLT 1.0 also allows extension of output methods and sorting
datatypes, which are not guaranteed to be supported.
- XSLT 1.0 processors are not required to support
disable-output-escaping.
James
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list