- From: Nick Van den Bleeken <Nick.Van.den.Bleeken@inventivegroup.com>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:43:31 +0200
- To: Claudius Teodorescu <claud108@yahoo.com>
- CC: "www-forms@w3.org" <www-forms@w3.org>
Hi Claudius, It is indeed a 'small' difference but supporting a stylsheet in the instance (or somewhere external with a uri using the doc() function) is much more flexible then only supporting a URI, but has the disadvantage that it is harder to detect if you already have a compiled version of the stylesheet and therefore it is maybe needed to have a separate compile and transform function, which is a bit more complex for the form author then only one function. Regards, Nick Van den Bleeken R&D Manager Phone: +32 3 821 01 70 Office Fax: +32 3 821 01 71 nick.van.den.bleeken@inventivegroup.com http://www.inventivedesigners.com Linked in > -----Original Message----- > From: www-forms-request@w3.org [mailto:www-forms-request@w3.org] On Behalf > Of Claudius Teodorescu > Sent: donderdag 15 april 2010 14:36 > To: Nick Van den Bleeken > Cc: www-forms@w3.org > Subject: Re: New XPath extension function called xslt() > > Hi Nick, > > If one uses for stylesheet the expression > "instance('i0')/path/to/stylesheet" or "file://path/to/stylesheet" (or > similar), I guess this solves the problem. It is a small difference if the > stylesheet is contained in an instance or in a file. > > > Claudius Teodorescu > > > > > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- > Inventive Designers' Email Disclaimer: http://www.inventivedesigners.com/email-disclaimer -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. --
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 12:44:12 UTC