- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2009 10:21:03 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6775 --- Comment #17 from Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> 2009-06-04 10:21:02 --- (In reply to comment #16) > But Henri's scenario when result of transformation is not serialized but stored > directly into DOM, which is only materialization of XDM, is IMHO out of scope > of XSLT spec (as Mike already pointed out). Out of curiosity, when you (and Mike) say out of scope for the XSLT spec, does this mean also out of scope for the XSL Working Group. I would have thought that DOM output is as much in scope as serialization output which the working group did produce a spec for. > If I understand it correctly, this > problem is mainly when <?xml-stylesheet?> is used. Then the right place to fix > this problem is probably in the <?xml-stylesheet?> spec by adding note > explaining this normalization. I think it is good time to make this change as > XML Core WG is preparing new edition of stylesheet association spec. Agreed, the stylesheet association spec is entirely too under defined. For example such a simple question of if the XDM tree produced by a XSLT transformation is output as a serialization or a DOM is totally unanswered. Resulting in different browsers doing different things. And if <?xml-stylesheet?> applies to documents loaded for other purposes than rendering (such as when loaded using XMLHttpRequest). It'd also be nice to officially define the parameter-passing processing instructions that firefox has implemented. https://developer.mozilla.org/En/XSLT/PI_Parameters -- 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 Thursday, 4 June 2009 10:21:10 UTC