- From: Oliver Becker <obecker@informatik.hu-berlin.de>
- Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2004 18:12:46 +0200 (MEST)
- To: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@yahoo.com>
- Cc: Jim Melton <jim.melton@acm.org>, public-qt-comments@w3.org
This is a silly discussion, I believe ... However, here are my two cents again > This is how I understand the question of Mike Kay: > > "How would you associate the <xsl:else> with the <xsl:if>? Perhaps by > wrapping both of them in an <xsl:choose>?" Answer: the first preceding sibling of xsl:else has to be an xsl:if (after stripping whitespace). The inconvenience of checking where the xsl:else belongs to is purely the point of view of the implementor. For the user this is very simple to understand and to write. <xsl:if/><xsl:else/> would be simply an abbreviation for <xsl:choose><xsl:when/><xsl:otherwise/></xsl:choose> just as @foo is an abbreviation for attribute::foo So I think there are no factual reasons against xsl:else, some people like it (as me for example), others don't (as you and Mike Kay). That's all. Best regards, Oliver
Received on Saturday, 3 April 2004 11:12:50 UTC