Subject: Re: RE: syntax sugar for call-template
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2001 17:45:19 GMT
|
I do not like the idea of "return" inside a "template", I was
only after an abbreviated method to call templates from within
other templates; not call templates from within a xpath expr.
Maybe I lost the thread of this thread but I thought your suggested
short form was exactly calling the template using xpath extension
function syntax?
If I had a need for calling a method from within XPath, then
I *do* like your suggestion about a seperate "function" declaration
for creating functions callable from Xpath. It makes sense
to have it a seperate construct for the reasons I believe
you pointed out:
....
different from the 'template requirements; and as such
they should be seperate constructs. I belive this is your
position isn't it? IMHO, trying to merge them will be
FAQ heaven....
Oh so basic agreement around then on this point, it seems.
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
|