- From: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>
- Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2007 07:41:18 -0800
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org
- Message-ID: <874pq5yjfl.fsf@nwalsh.com>
/ Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com> was heard to say: | On 1/31/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote: |> A smart implementation can do the right thing a choose the right |> processor. I did that in smallx in that XSLT 1.0 was handled by my version |> of XT and XSLT 2.0 was handled by saxon. | | I agree. | | I just have some doubts about the warning mechanism. I am referring | to: "An implementations are allowed to use and XSLT 2.0 processor to | run an XSLT 1.0 transformation but a warning must be issued". I would | prefer, like Norm suggested, to have an optional parameter that the | pipeline author can set to say that he really wants to use an 1.0 | engine or a 2.0 engine, whatever the version attribute in the | stylesheet says. In most cases pipeline authors won't need to worry | about this parameter and everything will work for them as expected. I think this introduces a new kind of parameter. While we've been saying that parameters passed to the xslt component are exposed to the processor, this would be a parameter that was consumed by the pipeline and not exposed. Do we really want to go there? Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh XML Standards Architect Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2007 15:41:34 UTC