[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [xsl] ANNOUNCE: Petition to withdraw xsl:script from XSLT 1.1
- From: "Clark C. Evans" <email@example.com>
- To: Steve Muench <Steve.Muench@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 18:11:23 -0500 (EST)
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Steve Muench wrote:
> | The xsl:script construct makes no attempt to handle
> | multiple language bindings for the same functionality.
> It actually does. Please reread section 14.4 starting with the text:
> "If there are multiple xsl:script elements with the
> same namespace URI but different implementation languages,
> then each implementation language corresponds to an
> alternative implementation of the same extension functions."
> It has made an attempt to deal with multiple languages.
> Whether you like the approach it has taken is another
> matter entirely :-)
Yes, I'm aware of that. The thought was not expressed clearly.
The problem with this approach is that the XSLT author must
identify each and every implementation possibility, rather than
referencing a opaque handle which can be registered seperately
as a catalogue or delegative RDDL mechanism that provides for a
complete alternation of language options.