Re: reliability of MSXML

On Fri, Nov 09, 2001 at 10:12:22AM -0000, Michael Kay wrote:
> >   Okay, I apologize to Mike for the harsh wording.
> 
> No apology needed. I'm fully aware that I made some design decisions which,
> with hindsight, have proved wrong and have caused the community some
> portability problems.

  Question: what's the best way to try to get rid of the problem
	    (or at least make it easier to handle) ?

I didn't follow XSLT development lately, is the NodeSet/ResultValueTree
difference garanteed to disapear in 2.0 ? That would be a good indication.
Maybe the XSL WG chairs would agree on getting this information out,
possibly after consulting the group.

I assume SAXON has completely unified the two notions and so this would
requires a lot of code rewrite to (re)implement the distinction, even to
simply raise a warning ...

  Hum, the issue is not simple,

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard@xxxxxxxxxx  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/

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