RE: Re: Re: The Perils of Sudden Type-Safety in XPath

> >http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#d5e7759

> >The WD Spec contains the first of the above examples. The second was
> >added by me, because it is perfectly legal now, according to the
> >current WD Spec.
> 
> from reading the spec I don't think that these 
> 
> > ><xsl:variable name="x" select="0"/>
> 
> 
> > ><xsl:variable name="x" select="3"/>
> 
> > >  <xsl:variable name="x" select="$x + 2"/>
> 
> are legal

I know that it seems unbelievable, but they *are* legal, exactly
according to the spec: ...

"It is also not an error if a binding established by a local
xsl:variable or xsl:param element shadows another binding established
by another local xsl:variable or xsl:param. "

And in the previous threads Mike Kay explained that according to the
current spec these are legal.


> can you point me to the part in the spec where that is allowed? If
> that's right I'm gonna have to take the day off to go indulge in
heavy
> drugs.

This is exactly how I felt when first encountered this new XSLT 2.0
feature.









=====
Cheers,

Dimitre Novatchev.
http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more
http://taxes.yahoo.com/

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