• To: "David Carlisle" <davidc@n...>, <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Subject: RE: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• From: "Evan Lenz" <evan@e...>
• Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 00:10:59 -0700
• Cc: <AndrewWatt2000@a...>, <xml-dev@l...>
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <200205122245.XAA20679@p...>

David Carlisle wrote:
> As far as I can see it's going to be
> a real pain to write portable XSLT 2.0 stylesheets (unless we're
> provided with a switch to put in the stylesheet that says not to mess
> with a schema even if one is found for the document).

As Mike Kay has mentioned, there has been talk in the working group about
supporting a "schema-less" conformance level for XSLT 2.0, whatever that may
come to mean. Concrete suggestions such as this (parenthetical) one are just
what we need to determine the requirements for such a conformance level,
should we decide to pursue one. I personally encourage sending focused, well
thought out suggestions scoped to this particular issue, i.e. what do you
want in a "schema-less" conformance level for XSLT 2.0, to
public-qt-comments@w...

Evan Lenz
(speaking for himself only, not on behalf of the XSL WG)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Handling of "error value" in XPATH 2.0
• Next by Date: XML specialized programming/transformation/query languages: can onefit all?
• Previous by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Next by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread