RE: xslt2 issues

Mike wrote:
> 
> > Issue (user-functions-vs-vendor-functions): Should 
> > user-defined functions
> > override vendor-defined functions of the same name, as 
> > specified here, or
> > should it be the other way around?
> > 
> > I would support a 'end user wins' approach, i.e. the 
> > stylesheet authors code
> > overrides
> > the vendor code. 
> > 
> > Rationale the same as with CSS stylesheets. Application 
> proposes, user
> > disposes, to use the WAI phrasing.
> > 
> I think the counter-example that was put forward was where 
> the stylesheet
> imports a third-party library such as exslt:math, where the vendor has
> inbuilt implementations of some of those functions.

If I (rightly or wrongly) import something from exslt, then its 
still my prerogative as 'user' to make use of it, despite the fact
that Microsoft or 4xslt or Saxon may 'do it better' ?

I can see the frustrated responses of end users when they 'don't get 
what they wanted (more likely expected)' ?



> 
> On the whole I agree with you that it's better the end-user 
> function should
> win. But we may want to permit a vendor-defined mechanism 
> that allows users
> to control the precedence. Just a thought. 

I'd vote against that on the previous principle.

Regards DaveP


- 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, 
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your 
system.

RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any 
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are 
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email 
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

Received on Thursday, 3 January 2002 11:21:24 UTC