- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 12:30:33 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
- CC:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=3002 ------- Comment #1 from mike@saxonica.com 2006-03-15 12:30 ------- Good point. I think the output has to be <out><foo/><foo/><bar/></out>: that is, we really do treat it as if the union template rule was "rolled out" into two separate rules, one for each branch of the union. The results might be odd, but anything else is likely to be odder. For example consider a case where the matching templates in order of decreasing priority are T1, T2, T1, T3: we have to say that if the first match is T1, then successive next-match calls will invoke T2, T1, and T3 in that order. Your case is the same but with T2 removed. I think this is currently well-specified even if the consequences might not have been predicted. Michael Kay
Received on Wednesday, 15 March 2006 12:30:49 UTC