Re: is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transforma

  That's very hard to do. There are good reasons why XSLT is defined in
  terms of a transformation of one data model instance to another, leaving
  a great deal of flexibility as to how (and whether) the data model
  instance is derived from some source XML document. 


agreed, however...

However while XSLT1 is usefully vague in this area which allows
dom manipulations before transformation, or sax parsing a gedcom file as
input, there is an understanding that document() when given a uri
pointing at an xml document _doesnt_ radically modify the document
before passing it to XSLT.

> If we said that the input had to be source XML,
the main input just comes from "somewhere" but the document() function 
could be more explicit about what is supposed to happen if the uri
returns something with an xml mime type (without preventing it doing
something intersting on non-xml data).


If a conforming XSLT processor can output "hello world" given any
input as it  always constructs the same PSVI tree given any document then
how can you ever do any conformance testing?

David


________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star Internet. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________

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