- From: Mukul Gandhi <mukul_gandhi@yahoo.com>
- Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 03:47:51 -0700 (PDT)
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
Thank you Mike for update about this subject. I am obliged, that XSL WG is spending its precious time on this trivial point. Regards, Mukul --- bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org wrote: > > http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=1319 > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From mike@saxonica.com > 2005-05-20 21:37 ------- > A further progress report following XSL WG meetings > this week: > > (a) we decided that a transformation always produces > at least one result tree. > Contrary to what's stated in a couple of places at > the moment, if the initial > template returns an empty sequence and if > xsl:result-document has not been > called, then an empty result tree should be produced > (in practice, if you are > serializing, the output destination should be > overwritten with an empty file). > > (b) we realized that there's a problem with the > current text if the initial > template has an "as" attribute, for example if it > is: > > <xsl:template match="xs:integer+"> > <xsl:sequence select="1 to 5"/> > </xsl:template> > > The current rules say this is equivalent to > > <xsl:template match="xs:integer+"> > <xsl:result-document> > <xsl:sequence select="1 to 5"/> > </xsl:result-document> > </xsl:template> > > which would give a type error; but that's > problematic since we don't know in > advance which template will be the initial entry > template. > > (c) we also realized that there's nothing in the > spec currently which says > whether or not an implementation is allowed to > provide alternative processing > models for running the code in a stylesheet, for > example by calling an > xsl:function directly from the API. > > So we're leaving the bug open for the moment as our > placeholder for sorting out > these issues with the processing model. > > Michael Kay > > __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Received on Saturday, 21 May 2005 10:47:56 UTC