W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > February 2007

Re: XSLT Component

From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:41:18 -0800
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <874pq5yjfl.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com> was heard to say:
| On 1/31/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
|> A smart implementation can do the right thing a choose the right
|> processor.  I did that in smallx in that XSLT 1.0 was handled by my version
|> of  XT and XSLT 2.0 was handled by saxon.
|
| I agree.
|
| I just have some doubts about the warning mechanism. I am referring
| to: "An implementations are allowed to use and XSLT 2.0 processor to
| run an XSLT 1.0 transformation but a warning must be issued". I would
| prefer, like Norm suggested, to have an optional parameter that the
| pipeline author can set to say that he really wants to use an 1.0
| engine or a 2.0 engine, whatever the version attribute in the
| stylesheet says. In most cases pipeline authors won't need to worry
| about this parameter and everything will work for them as expected.

I think this introduces a new kind of parameter. While we've been
saying that parameters passed to the xslt component are exposed to the
processor, this would be a parameter that was consumed by the pipeline
and not exposed. Do we really want to go there?

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

Received on Thursday, 1 February 2007 15:41:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:49 GMT