Subject: RE: is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation)
From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 14:08:25 -0000
|
> But they have to pay the price of vastly increased complexity
> in the specification (and one assumes in the text books that
> will follow).
If they were paying, either for the specs or for the products, then they
might have more ability to influence the outcome...
>
> As the conformance levels are not specified it's hard to
> comment on them but it would seem likely given the current
> XSLT draft that given a document and a stylesheet which does
> not refer to a schema explictly a schema-aware XSLT engine
> will produce different results (because it sees vastly
> different input) than a non-schema aware processor...
Yes, this is likely. We're exploring this area at the moment: for
example there are suggestions that a stylesheet should be able to say
whether it requires to use a schema-aware (or non-schema-aware)
processor, to ensure interoperable results.
Note that we already have this in a very basic form with ID attributes
in XSLT 1.0; these will be recognized by the id() function or not,
depending on the XML parser you use.
Michael Kay
Software AG
home: Michael.H.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxx
work: Michael.Kay@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|