Hello Mr. Graham,
Thank you for your suggestion. I will revise the presentation method
in the next version.
Best Regards,
Tokushige Kobayashi
Reply to the original mail from:
xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
A single percentage for implementation level is too broad a
categorisation to be useful. The XSL 1.0 Recommendation defines three
conformance levels, and it would be more useful to present the
implementation levels broken up by conformance level. Showing that
multiple implementations have 100% or close to 100% for 'Basic'
conformance would be a good thing for boosting public confidence in
XSL interoperability. Hiding the common level of 'Basic' conformance
shows XSL interoperability as worse than it really is and will
discourage any people who won't adopt XSL unless there's
interoperability.
Regards,
Tony Graham
------------------------------------------------------------------------
XML Technology Center - Dublin
Sun Microsystems Ireland Ltd Phone: +353 1 8199708
Hamilton House, East Point Business Park, Dublin 3 x(70)19708
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Tokushige Kobayashi
Antenna House, Inc.
E-mail koba(_at_)antenna(_dot_)co(_dot_)jp
WWW http://www.antenna.co.jp/XML/xml-top.htm
WWW http://www.antennahouse.com/xslformatter.html (English)
TEL +81-3-3234-1361(direct call)
FAX +81-3-3221-9975
Antenna House XSL School
http://www.antenna.co.jp/XML/school/xslday.htm
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list