RE: the problem with include and import

>
> Anyhow, there appears to be little interest in this thread.  I guess
> robustness & scalability aren't high priorities for the WG or
> other users on
> the list.  Alternatively, perhaps I'm just making a very poor
> case for the
> vulnerabilities and limitations of the include/import
> mechanism, due to the
> decision to constrain name scoping, via XML namespaces, to be
> done only on a
> per-stylesheet basis, rather than allowing namespaces per-stylesheet
> instance.
>
> Maybe I'll try to construct some examples.
>

If you want me to take an interest in the thread, you'll certainly need to
construct some good examples that illustrate the perceived problem. I can
think of ideas for improving the current modularity mechanisms, for example
by allowing variables, functions, and named templates to have global scope
within a module without being public to other modules, or by allowing them
to be declared "final" so they can't be overridden; but I don't really see a
need for a module that imports objects from another module to alias the
names of those objects, which is what you seem to be proposing. In fact, I
can't think of any language that does that.

Mike Kay


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