I think numeric priorities would become pretty unmanageable if they had
global significance rather than applying only locally within a module.
That's the only reason I can think of.
There are all sorts of things one could do to improve the modularity of XSLT
- public/private attributes on variables and named templates, template
priority linked to the schema type hierarchy, syntactically-scoped template
rules, template rules linked to a stage in a pipeline, etc: but none of them
is really compelling in my view.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Welch [mailto:ajwelch(_at_)piper-group(_dot_)com]
Sent: 31 January 2005 11:12
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: [xsl] Priority and import precedence
It seems the priority attribute on a template is of less
importance than
the order in which stylesheets are imported, when using
xsl:apply-imports.
For example, if stylesheet A imports stylesheets B and C (in that
order), templates in B will always be selected over C regardless of
priority.
Is there a reason for this? (It seems strange as usually the
'one that
comes last' selection process is the last resort, not the first)
cheers
andrew
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:
<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--