- From: Kay, Michael <Michael.Kay@softwareag.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2001 13:49:16 +0100
- To: "'Jeni Tennison'" <jeni@jenitennison.com>, xsl-editors@w3.org, w3c-xsl-wg@w3.org
A personal reaction: I can't see any particular problem with this change (there is a theoretical backwards incompatibility, but a very minor one): but nor can I see any pressing need for it. All the examples that I've seen of vendor-supplied extension attributes apply to XSLT instructions, not to literal result elements. Mike Kay > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeni Tennison [mailto:jeni@jenitennison.com] > Sent: 19 November 2001 16:19 > To: xsl-editors@w3.org; w3c-xsl-wg@w3.org > Subject: Extension attributes > > > Hi, > > There are certain attributes in the XSLT namespace that can be placed > on any literal result element (e.g. xsl:exclude-result-prefixes, > xsl:use-attribute-sets). > > Currently, though, if you specify an extension attribute on a literal > result element, in a namespace other than the XSLT namespace, it > always gets added to the result tree [Section 7.1.1]. > > I think it would tie in better with the behaviour of the XSLT > attributes and with extension elements if the effect of > extension-element-prefixes/xsl:extension-element-prefixes were > extended such that attributes with extension namespaces are not added > to the result tree. > > I haven't got a real use case for it, but the fact that there are such > attributes in the XSLT namespace implies that it's possible to think > of extension attributes for xsl:element, and hence for literal result > elements, that you wouldn't want to include in the result tree. > > Cheers, > > Jeni > --- > Jeni Tennison > http://www.jenitennison.com/ >
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2001 07:49:23 UTC