- From: Michael Kay <mhk@mhk.me.uk>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:54:15 -0000
- To: "'Oliver Becker'" <obecker@informatik.hu-berlin.de>, <Mark.Scardina@oracle.com>, <public-qt-comments@w3.org>
- Cc: <w3c-xsl-wg@w3.org>
You are right of course. I already went beyond the original proposal in improving the original description, and was hesitant to do more, but there is always further room for improvement. Michael Kay > -----Original Message----- > From: Oliver Becker [mailto:obecker@informatik.hu-berlin.de] > Sent: 20 February 2004 08:20 > To: Mark.Scardina@oracle.com; public-qt-comments@w3.org; mhk@mhk.me.uk > Cc: w3c-xsl-wg@w3.org > Subject: RE: ORA-XS-370-B: Signature of function-available() > > > Michael Kay wrote this revised excerpt of section 16.1.1: > > > 16.1.1 Testing Availability of Functions > > The function-available function can be used with the xsl:choose and > > xsl:if instructions to explicitly control how a stylesheet > behaves if > > a particular extension function is not available. > > While it is true that function-available() will be used most > probably with xsl:choose and xsl:if, I think it can be used > within any XPath expression, isn't it? So the usage with > these instructions should be mentioned rather as a note, not > as the definition of function-available(). > > Best regards, > Oliver Becker > > > /-------------------------------------------------------------------\ > | ob|do Dipl.Inf. Oliver Becker | > | --+-- E-Mail: obecker@informatik.hu-berlin.de | > | op|qo WWW: http://www.informatik.hu-berlin.de/~obecker | > \-------------------------------------------------------------------/ >
Received on Friday, 20 February 2004 09:53:43 UTC