Re: Media-types and GRDDL

On 9/6/06, Dan Connolly <> wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-09-06 at 10:35 +0200, Danny Ayers wrote:
> > On 9/5/06, Harry Halpin <> wrote:

> > > Notice I'm intentionally a bit vague about XSLT 1.0 or XSLT 2.0 here.
> >
> > This bit troubles me a little. Passing an XSLT 2.0 transformation to
> > an XSLT 1.0 engine will result in an error,
> Really? Did you get that from a spec or from experience? I'd like
> to think there's some forward compatibility.

I asked informally on irc:

danja: so, the question: what happens in general if you pass an XSLT
2.0 transformation to an XSLT 1.0 engine?
[6:26pm] ndw: Right. I think that makes sense.
[6:26pm] ndw: The XProc stuff that relies on XPath is likely to use 1.0
[6:26pm] ndw: The 1.0 processor performs it in "forwards compatible" mode
[6:26pm] ndw: Most things work like you'd expect. Errors that would be
fatal in a 1.0 stylesheet aren't and can be caught with an
[6:26pm] ndw: So it's possible, usually, though sometimes it's tricky,
to write a stylesheet that will work in either case.
[6:26pm] ndw: Probably less work to just write it in 1.0 though, for a
grddl transform
[6:27pm] danja: but assuming you have an XSLT 2.0 that isn't very XSLT
1.0 considerate - will it just error out in an XSLT 1.0 processor?
[6:28pm] ndw: XSLT 1.0 tries not to have very many fatal errors, I
think you'll get a lot of defaulted behavior, but ultimately, yes, I
think you can make it error out

> It certainly seems like a good thing to test in our test suite.




Received on Wednesday, 6 September 2006 16:40:07 UTC