Lists Home |
Date Index |
I would much rather be crystal clear, and cause some pain, than to be murky,
and have people think they can ignore it.
I think such a change would call for a new version of XSLT also, that uses a
different method of interpreting fully-qualified names. The new XSLT could
work equally well on XML 1.0 or XML 1.1 documents.
XSLT 1.0 would continue to work unchanged, but would be restricted to XML
I didn't start this fight, XSLT started it when it used prefixes in content.
It accumulated bad Karma in so doing. I suggest a healthy cleansing of XSLT,
before the bad Karma infects all of XML (if it hasn't already).
>From: Richard Tobin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: [xml-dev] [good] Question about NS 1.1
>Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 23:41:55 +0100 (BST)
> >Painful, yes. But if XML Blueberry goes into XML 1.1 there's going to be
> >breaking changes anyway.
>What are you thinking of here? The aim is for there to be no XML 1.0
>documents that don't work with XML 1.1 parsers, and very few cases of
>XML 1.0 documents that don't work when relabelled as XML 1.1.
>(Possible ones are: documents with unnormalized Unicode, if
>normalization checking is required; documents that rely on NEL not
>being treated as a line-end; I can't think of any others off-hand.)
>Or were you thinking of processors that will need to be changed?
>I am surprised by some of the suggestions that have been made here - I
>think the Core WG would not even have considered a change that forced
>people to re-write most XSLT stylesheets.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.