2. What I find ridiculous is not the "new world of XML Schema-typed
documents ", but a functional language that will allow the
following:
<xsl:variable name="x" select="0"/>
<xsl:for-each ...
<xsl:variable name="x" select="$x + 1"/>
The above does seem messy.
or
<xsl:variable name="x" select="0"/>
<xsl:variable name="x" select="3"/>
<xsl:variable name="x" select="$x + 2"/>
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.
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.
"Thus, the following is not an error, but is discouraged, because
the
effect
is probably not what was intended. " ?
This sounds like a stylistic manuals warning against indulging in
slang, because the meaning conveyed is often not the meaning
intended. Does xslt 2.0 allow slang?!
Will great xslt users be able to use these facilities of the new
language because of a sort of poetic license available to them?
Like you, I hope that somebody will care to answer these questions.
=====
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