• To: Joe English <jenglish@f...>
• Subject: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• From: John Cowan <jcowan@r...>
• Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 17:46:59 -0400
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <200306192031.h5JKV1125162@d...>
• References: <3EF2046D.5050404@b...> <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F8064844AD@R...> <200306192031.h5JKV1125162@d...>
• User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Joe English scripsit:

> Since the idea of client-side XSLT is pretty much dead in
> the water, a good case can be made that it doesn't need a
> single standard either.  

Even in a pure server environment, portability counts.

-- 
MEET US AT POINT ORANGE AT MIDNIGHT BRING YOUR DUCK OR PREPARE TO FACE WUGGUMS
John Cowan   http://www.reutershealth.com   jcowan@r...

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>

• References:
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>
  • RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Create XML
• Next by Date: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Previous by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread