Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes: > 2009/2/5 Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>: >> "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> States >>> The XProc processor must support a few additional functions in XPath >>> expressions evaluated by the processor. >>> >>> Suggest >>> >>> An XProc implementation must support additional functions in XPath >>> expressions as defined in this section. >> >> No, I don't like that. It suggests, to me, that there's some special >> constraint on implementations not otherwise imposed on processors. >> The processor is what must support the additional functions. > > In which case be explicit about 'a few', i.e. which additional functions > must be supported? > > That was the intent of my comment Norm? Just clarity. Ah. Sorry. How's this: <para>The XProc processor <rfc2119>must</rfc2119> support the additional functions described in this section in XPath expressions evaluated by the processor.</para> Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | The human race consists of the http://nwalsh.com/ | dangerously insane and such as are | not.--Mark TwainReceived on Thursday, 5 February 2009 15:45:05 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 5 February 2009 15:45:06 GMT