Re: [closed] Re: 2.7 XPath Extension Functions

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 Twain