- From: Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 06:30:49 -0400
- To: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org
- Message-ID: <m2bpzm3bja.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@gmail.com> was heard to say: | thx goes to MohamedZ for pointing out the current WG debate as I had | my own PSVI questions. | | a few ruminations on PSVI; | | * what if we want to preserve PSVI annotations through a step that | does not require it ? e.g. something like a psvi-passthru attribute | though perhaps all this is a bit cumbersome for corner case? Most of the steps can change the structure of a document. That could make any of the PSVI properties invalid. I think it's better to say you have to (re)validate after you run those steps. | * what happens when p:xslt is using a validating XSLT v2.0 does the | existing psvi-required attribute need to be set to true then ? I think the behavior in the absence of @psvi-required is implementation-defined. The XSLT step is always free to produce PSVI annotations. You only need to put @psvi-required on the step that *consumes* XSLT output if you want to be sure that the implementation kept them. Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Wisdom is only a comparative quality, http://nwalsh.com/ | it will not bear a single | definition.--Marquess of Halifax
Received on Thursday, 21 August 2008 10:31:35 UTC