- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:52:35 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6775 David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |davidc@nag.co.uk --- Comment #10 from David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> 2009-06-02 08:52:35 --- (In reply to comment #8) > It's unclear to me where this bug report is leading. Is a change needed to the > XSLT specification (or related specifications), and if so, what is that change? > I suspect that one thing that would help here is some standardised way of passing the serialisation parameters through into (or along with) the XDM output tree. It's not clear what form that should take though as all the "obvious" ways using attributes or process instructions are likely to (by default) to produce nodes in the result rather than just affect the serialisation. Much as I've complained elsewhere about the PSVI's bad status as a non-xml set of properties that have to be passed by some unspecified API along with the validated XML, perhaps something like that is needed here as well. Currently the model is that if XSLT doesn't do the serialisation xsl:output is essentially ignored. As well as the client side use in the initial comment here this often bites people using say msxml where it's very easy to end up getting an msxml dom and using the dom serialiser. The XSLT spec could say that if the result of the transformation is passed on as an XDM tree and not serialised then the system _MAY_ pass on the serialisation parameters specified in xsl:output (or defaulted, eg because the document element is html in no-namespace) as properties specified in the serialisation spec, which a later process MAY use for whatever reason. So in the case in comment #7, the browser's internal xslt transform could produce a DOM tree along with an "html output method" property which it wouldn't actually use for serialisation, but could use to do whaetever html-specific stuff it needs to do. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Tuesday, 2 June 2009 08:52:51 UTC