This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: RE; Re: RE: syntax sugar for call-template
- To: <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>, <davidc at nag dot co dot uk>
- Subject: RE: [xsl] RE; Re: RE: syntax sugar for call-template
- From: "Michael Kay" <mhkay at iclway dot co dot uk>
- Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 21:33:29 -0000
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> It is possible to have a positional only syntax form like in:
>
> fn(functionQName, p1="p1Value" ... pN="pNValue")
>
> ... The above will be directly usable from within an XPath expression.
>
Not within an XPath 1.0 expression it won't.
Within the XSL+XPath conformance rules, we have the option of defining new
extension functions and extension elements, we don't have the option of
extending the XPath syntax.
(If it weren't for that, I'd be perfectly happy with named arguments in
function calls.)
Mike Kay
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list