Re: xsl:transform

[Elliotte Rusty Harold]
>I just noticed that the April 21 working draft of XSLT introduced
>xsl:transform as an exact synonym for xsl:stylesheet. This duplication
>has continued into the current proposed recommendation. Why was this
>done? I can understand preferring xsl:transform to xsl:stylesheet, but
>why are there two elements for exactly the same purpose?  Wouldn't it be
>simpler to just pick one?

Simpler, but politically sticky.  Some people wanted to use XSLT just for
transforms, and didn't want to mention "stylesheet" at all.  At the same
time, XSLT was developed in support of a stylesheet language, and intended
primarily for use as same, and getting rid of the word "stylesheet" would
have been politically incorrect for a number of reasons.  The programmers
on the WG agreed that supporting two names for the same thing is trivial,
and someone explaining the language can mention the synonym once (if at
all) and use the name of their choice consistently in discussions and
examples.

-Chris

--
Christopher R. Maden, Solutions Architect
Exemplary Technologies
One Embarcadero Center, Ste. 2405
San Francisco, CA 94111



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list