[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: Arjun Ray <aray@n...>
• Date: Tue, 14 May 2002 18:57:02 +0000
• In-reply-to: <200205140201.g4E214S02202@d...>
• References: <002401c1fadd$52121e00$0bf13044@tbp> <NDBBLMPNADEOOKGELJALMEBICJAA.evan@e...> <200205130917.KAA23038@p...> <200205140201.g4E214S02202@d...>

In <200205140201.g4E214S02202@d...>, Joe English
<jenglish@f...> wrote:

| It seems to me that a good strategy for infoset-augmenting processes
| would be to simply add attributes with a distinguished namespace.

There's a traditional precedent for this;-)

| This keeps things entirely within the XML 1.0 data model.
| For example, instead of adding a [type definition name] information
| set item to an element, it could add an "xs:type" attribute.

How different is this from a NOTATION, though?

| Those that need to augment attributes should really think twice
| about wanting to do that :-), but HyTime-style paired lists would
| work here.

Perhaps, except that paired lists can't be extracted without an extension
function.  (One reason why I find XSLT disappointing.)

• References:
  • Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
    • From: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@c...>
  • 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: Joe English <jenglish@f...>

• Prev by Date: Re: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• Next by Date: Re: frustration (was RE: XPath 2.0 )
• Previous by thread: Re: XSLT 2.0 and XSL(-FO) 2.0
• Next by thread: Handling of "error value" in XPATH 2.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread