Subject: Re: XSLT 1.1 comments (portability)
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2001 18:43:37 GMT
|
> 3) No substitute for testing on multiple processors
which relates to a question I was going to ask about what do people mean
by a portable stylesheet.
One that doesn't use features of XSLT declared to be system independent
or
One that works uniformly on the XSL engines you have available.
For example, as a general rule I use xt or saxon or msxml3 (in that
order) I don't really know why i use xt out of preference except habit
and it takes less keystrokes,
But for me, a portable stylesheet doesn't use keys doesn't use any fancy
java extensions (but can use some built in ones like multiple output
files and node-set()) and doesn't rely on text nodes working as
advertised in the presence of CDATA markup.
David
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
Maddy - Fri, 16 Feb 2001 05:57:44 -0500 (EST)
Joshua Allen - Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:19:09 -0500 (EST)
- David Carlisle - Fri, 16 Feb 2001 13:49:06 -0500 (EST) <=
Kaganovich, Yevgeniy (Eugene) - Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:43:18 -0500 (EST)
|
|