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,

Norman Walsh
XML Standards Architect
Sun Microsystems, Inc.

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:32:41 UTC