W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-mobileok-checker@w3.org > May 2007

RE: More checked into CVS

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Tue, 15 May 2007 13:14:38 +0100
Message-ID: <C8FFD98530207F40BD8D2CAD608B50B42B4079@mtldsvr01.DotMobi.local>
To: Roland Gülle <roland@7val.com>
Cc: <public-mobileok-checker@w3.org>


What I had in mind was transforming the error string dependent on a choice of output language. Why would XINCLUDE work better than xsl:include?

Thanks
Jo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roland Gülle [mailto:roland@7val.com]
> Sent: 15 May 2007 13:08
> To: Jo Rabin
> Cc: public-mobileok-checker@w3.org
> Subject: Re: More checked into CVS
> 
> 
> > The main point was to ask if we really do need to use XSLT 2.0
> > features, and if not, then stick with 1.0.
> +1 to XSLT 1.0
> 
> > Would it be better, for example, for the error messages to be
> > defined in an external XSLT file?
> I would recommend an xinclude instead of an XSLT for error messages.
> 
>   roland
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 15 May 2007 12:16:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:13:03 GMT