RE: [XSLT 2.0] Conformance levels

Thank you for this comment. Personal response: The working group did think
quite carefully about whether to allow processors to choose their own
favourite point on the spectrum from a basic XSLT processor to a fully
schema-aware processor, and decided that interoperability was best served by
disallowing this.

In practice, of course, there is no ban on anyone offering a processor that
has two modes of operation: (a) as a conformant basic-level processor, and
(b) as a non-conformant "basic plus selected bits of schema-awareness"
processor.

Although the formal comments period has expired, this comment will be added
to the WG's agenda.

Michael Kay 

# -----Original Message-----
# From: public-qt-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-qt-comments-
# request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Colin Paul Adams
# Sent: 29 February 2004 20:44
# To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
# Subject: [XSLT 2.0] Conformance levels
# 
# 
# I am somewhat peeved and the restrictions on a processor claiming
# basic level conformance - specifically not being allowed to assign
# type annotation to attributes other than xdt:untypedAtomic.
# 
# This means, that having developed a processor to basic level
# conformance, you cannot then develop it further towards full
# schema-aware conformance, except in one fell swoop, as if you
# implement on a step-by-step basis, you promptly lose the ability to
# claim basic level conformance.
# --
# Colin Paul Adams
# Preston Lancashire