Re: Re: xsl/xslt coding standard

Hello Jeni,

<snip>
(And that it uses documentation-element-prefixes rather than
extension-element-prefixes.)

I think it would be much less confusing if elements
that are intended as documentation were clearly marked as such to both
the author/reader and to the processor.
</snip>

Okay, i got it hopefully, it´s a proposition. Not yet realized. I am looking for a solution with xslt 1.0. recommendation standard.

<snip>
However, it would be rather pointless having a
template in your stylesheet that never got called or applied. In the
example we're using the template matches the root node, so its content
is always processed...
</snip>

So if a named template <doc:template> is embedded in a template rule which is matched <xsl:template match="/"> the processor look out for instructions in a named template without calling it becuase of its declaration as extension-element-prefixes?

If it is not an extension-element-prefixes type it would look out either as simple xml ?

If yes, why not declare in this way the documentation without <xsl:fallback />? 

And extracting in a second documenting stylesheet the documentation and avoiding in this way that  the documentating code of the first stylesheet are outputted? 

Excuse me please, if me question are too obvious!

Thanks,

Hans Braumüller 
-- + -- 
Networking Artist
http://crosses.net
http://kunstserie.com

 


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