- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:28:47 +0000
- To: public-qt-comments@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=26781 --- Comment #2 from Abel Braaksma <abel.braaksma@xs4all.nl> --- > I'm very reluctant to spend time on re-examining requirements at > this stage, or we will never finish. I understand, and I feel the same. However, I think that either the requirement is not met (in which case we should fix it, either by removing it, if the requirement has gone, or by amending it), or I misread the spec. If you do as you say: <xsl:package ...> <xsl:import href="existing-code.xsl"/> <xsl:expose ...> </xsl:package> you end up with the default potential visibility, which is private. It is only permitted, with xsl:expose, to change the potential visibility *down* (less public), not *up*. That means that private can be "changed" to private, but cannot be made public. In other words, using xsl:expose in the above example has no effect, unless we change the default visibility from private to public (I'd probably argue against that, but it would, as a by-product, solve the issues with xsl:param's visibility). -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 11 September 2014 12:28:52 UTC