[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
• Date: Mon, 13 May 2002 20:36:06 -0400
• References: <NDBBLMPNADEOOKGELJALMEBICJAA.evan@e...><200205130917.KAA23038@p...><1181819988344.20020513112423@j...><200205131028.LAA23575@p...>

[David Carlisle]

>
> > Do you think that it would make sense for the *only* validation to be
> > done on a document to be validation dictated by the stylesheet?
>
> yes.
>

Me, too, but with the proviso that there be some means to optionally tell
the processor to use the schema reference in the source document.
Otherwise, if we wanted to use the schema, the stylesheet would have to be
told the URI of the schema, which might be impossible - we wouldn't usually
know it.

It would also be useful to ask the processor to use the document-supplied
schema with a fallback to no-schema-processing if the specifiec schema
should not be available.  I'm not too sure about this one, though, because
what if part of the stylesheet referred to specific PSVI types?

Cheers,

Tom P

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• References:
  • RE: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: "Evan Lenz" <evan@e...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@j...>
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: David Carlisle <davidc@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Next by Date: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Previous by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Next by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread