W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > January 2010

RE: my thoughts on Mike Kay's AssocSS comments

From: Grosso, Paul <pgrosso@ptc.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 14:45:41 -0500
Message-ID: <CF83BAA719FD2C439D25CBB1C9D1D30211FD0BD7@HQ-MAIL4.ptcnet.ptc.com>
To: <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-xml-core-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-xml-core-wg-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Grosso, Paul
> Sent: Wednesday, 2010 January 13 13:01
> To: public-xml-core-wg@w3.org
> Subject: my thoughts on Mike Kay's AssocSS comments
> 
> Mike's comments are at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-stylesheet-
> comments/2009Dec/
> 0001
> 
> > 1. It would be nice to have a more detailed explanation
> > of what has changed.
> 
> I'm hoping Henry will be able to write this.
> 
> > 2. Since the specification is partially implemented in
> > current browsers, it would be useful to give users and
> > implementors some advice on how to achieve interoperable
> > behavior taking the current legacy into account. For example,
> > it would be useful to note that the pseudo-attribute
> > media="text/xsl" works on many current browsers though
> > disallowed by the spec, while the pseudo-attribute
> > media="application/xml+xslt" is legal but poorly supported
> > by current products.
> 
> Actually, I think Mike is referring to the type attribute,
> not the media attribute here.
> 
> In fact, during our earlier discussion, we decided that we
> would NOT disallow type="text/xsl", so our current text that
> says that the type attribute MUST match RFC 2616 needs to be
> changed.  Maybe just change MUST to SHOULD.

Actually, I looked at 2616, and it doesn't disallow text/xsl
because 2616 just defined the general syntax and then says
"Use of non-registered media types is discouraged" which
is like a "should not".

So, if I'm reading all this right, our current wording does
not disallow type="text/xsl".

Given that Mike thinks it does, I suppose that argues even
more strongly for the need of an informative note.

paul

> 
> I continue to hesitate to have this spec say much about the
> values of the PAs, but I could live with an informative note
> about text/xsl.
> 
> > 3. It might be worth mentioning that the charset pseudo-attribute
> > is ignored if the stylesheet is an XML document.
> 
> If this is true, we can have an informative note.  I wouldn't
> be surprised if this were true, but I also wouldn't be
> surprised if this issue were more complicated.  I'm hoping
> someone on the WG can weigh in here (John?).
> 
> > 4. It might be worth a reference to the XSLT specification
> > which gives further information on the use of this processing
> > instruction with XSLT stylesheets.
> 
> We can add a note and a non-normative reference.  The relevant
> section is http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#embedded
> 
> paul
> 
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 19:48:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 13 January 2010 19:48:23 GMT