Re: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> > After I realized that SAXON ( which is very good 
> > engine) makes hidden RTF->node-set typecast 
> > ( the thing MS were blamed for ),  I feel not 
> > comfortable when somebody says 
> > 'conformant XSLT engine'  in public place.
> 
> "conforming" to a spec that does not have an official conformance test suite 
> basically means "We have not come across any non-conformance in our testing, 
> or had any reported that are not scheduled for priority fixing".

> I think this is fair statement, and that you needn't take it as meaning more.

Exactly. That was my point.  

> > I think all vendors who are claming 100% conformance 
> > to the XSLT paper really meant : "we *think*  we are 
> > 100% conformant - we have not bother to make sure".
> 
> You'll have to point out the "vendors" claiming "100% conformance" more 
> accurately, because I have not seen that claim on this list.

I've seen something on xmlhack.com or somewhere. 
Don't remember.

I'm not blaming vendors. I'm trying to notify users who are 
trying to judge XSLT taking conformance into account.

Sorry for not accurate wording.

Rgds.Paul.




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