- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2008 15:05:50 +0100
- To: "Norman Walsh" <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
2008/11/28 Norman Walsh wrote: Hi, > Well. I see your point, but in this case the exsl:document extension > is both quasi-standard and widely deployed. And there's no compelling > reason for the MUST that exists in the current spec, it was just the > editor being overzealous, I think. But instead of telling about extensions (besides, you don't tell about XProc extensions, but XSLT extensions...) you can maybe relax the MUST and tell it is implementation -defined or -dependent. Regards, -- Florent Georges http://www.fgeorges.org/
Received on Saturday, 29 November 2008 14:06:26 UTC