Subject: Re: xsl:transform
From: "Oren Ben-Kiki" <oren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 1999 21:57:24 +0200
|
Christopher R. Maden <crism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> ... Some people wanted to use XSLT just for
> transforms, and didn't want to mention "stylesheet" at all. At the same
> time, XSLT was developed in support of a stylesheet language, and intended
> primarily for use as same, and getting rid of the word "stylesheet" would
> have been politically incorrect for a number of reasons. The programmers
> on the WG agreed that supporting two names for the same thing is trivial,
> and someone explaining the language can mention the synonym once (if at
> all) and use the name of their choice consistently in discussions and
> examples.
<WildGuess>
Is this also why disable-output-escaping is defined in the spec, but XSLT
processors are not required to implement it?
</WildGuess>
Have fun,
Oren Ben-Kiki
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|