- From: Glen Mazza <gmazza@apache.org>
- Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 13:05:34 -0400
- To: "xsl-editors@w3.org" <xsl-editors@w3.org>
Hello Editors, A question just came in on the FOP-User mailing list that appears to raise two issues in the 1.1 WD (text also in 1.0) regarding the wording in "2.2 XSL Namespace" section[1]: 1.) Quote: "An element from the XSL namespace may have any attribute not from the XSL namespace, provided that the expanded-name of the attribute has a non-null namespace URI. The --->presence of such attributes must not change the behavior of XSL elements<--- and functions defined in this document.": The arrowed portion above indicates that implementors may not create extension properties that provide any change to the functionality and/or appearance of the XSL formatting objects (that would otherwise be ignored by another implementation that doesn't understand the extension property). If I am reading this correctly, extension properties may then only have semantic value for extension (i.e., non-XSL) formatting objects. But I'm unsure of the benefit of that rule. There doesn't appear to be much value in allowing an extension attribute to be attached to XSL FO's if they may not alter the processing of that FO's. Also, it is the various implementators' work on extension attributes on already defined XSL FO's that help these extensions to be incorporated as official XSL properties in a future release of the recommendation. Further, these extension attributes could still be ignored with no effect on the standard FO functionality for another implementation that would not understand the extension attribute. I guess my recommendation would be to remove the sentence containing the arrows above. 2.) Quote: "It is an error for an element from the XSL namespace to have attributes with expanded-names that have null namespace URIs (i.e., attributes with unprefixed names) other than attributes -->defined for the element<-- in this document." The arrowed portion appears to contradict the rule that "Every formatting property may be specified on every formatting object." ([2], first sentence of chapter 5.) For example, I can place "starting-state" (null namespace URI) on fo:block, even though this property is not "defined for the element in this document." If I'm correct here, my recommendation would be to remove "for the element" at the very end of the quote above. Thanks, Glen [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#xsl-namespace [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#refinement
Received on Friday, 14 October 2005 06:15:54 UTC