On Sun, Feb 01, 2004 at 09:22:02AM +0100, Dimitre Novatchev wrote:
It seems to me that one distinguishing feature of good XSLT processor
implementations is a flexible design, which anticipates new features to be
added and allows to do this without pain.
Well node-set() is not part of XSLT. It will in XSLT-2.0, it's
not nowadays. And in 1.0 it was clear that:
- the processor had to differentiate RVT and node sets internally
in order to raise errors on misuse of RVT
- the fact that RVT existed was a clear indication that from
a language perspective, the designer of said language expected
both kind of set of nodes to be used very differently
As an implementor, I had to implement that checking and I based my
implementation on the spec. I had no reason *from the spec* to guess
that this distinction would not be enforced or broken in later revisions.
Concluding from that point that as a result my processor is not a
good XSLT implementation is a nice feedback, thank you,
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/
daniel(_at_)veillard(_dot_)com | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
http://veillard.com/ |
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list