my thoughts on Mike Kay's AssocSS comments

Mike's comments are at
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-stylesheet-comments/2009Dec/
0001

> 1. It would be nice to have a more detailed explanation
> of what has changed.

I'm hoping Henry will be able to write this.

> 2. Since the specification is partially implemented in
> current browsers, it would be useful to give users and
> implementors some advice on how to achieve interoperable
> behavior taking the current legacy into account. For example,
> it would be useful to note that the pseudo-attribute
> media="text/xsl" works on many current browsers though
> disallowed by the spec, while the pseudo-attribute
> media="application/xml+xslt" is legal but poorly supported
> by current products.

Actually, I think Mike is referring to the type attribute,
not the media attribute here.

In fact, during our earlier discussion, we decided that we
would NOT disallow type="text/xsl", so our current text that
says that the type attribute MUST match RFC 2616 needs to be
changed.  Maybe just change MUST to SHOULD.

I continue to hesitate to have this spec say much about the
values of the PAs, but I could live with an informative note
about text/xsl.

> 3. It might be worth mentioning that the charset pseudo-attribute
> is ignored if the stylesheet is an XML document.

If this is true, we can have an informative note.  I wouldn't
be surprised if this were true, but I also wouldn't be
surprised if this issue were more complicated.  I'm hoping
someone on the WG can weigh in here (John?).

> 4. It might be worth a reference to the XSLT specification
> which gives further information on the use of this processing
> instruction with XSLT stylesheets.

We can add a note and a non-normative reference.  The relevant
section is http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#embedded

paul

Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 19:02:16 UTC