At 12:56 PM 1/25/2005, you wrote:
Wendell> A reason it is optional is that serializers are optional,
Wendell> and if an implementor builds an engine with no
Wendell> expectation that the result tree will be written out to a
Wendell> file, how is it to be handled?
What about character maps then? They require a serializer too, and are
not optional.
It's a good question. I'm sure someone from the committee will be along
shortly, though I have to admit that if you're not implementing a
serializer, character maps would seem gratuitous. The spec does explicitly
call in the XSLT and XQuery Serialization spec when discussing them.
From the bleachers, it appears that (a) the intention may be that we use
character maps for most or all the evil things we sometimes do with d-o-e
in XSLT 1.0, and that (b) d-o-e's deprecation may have something to do with
the fact that, as the spec notes [XSLT 2.0 20.2], "This feature requires an
extension to the serializer described in [XSLT and XQuery Serialization]";
accordingly if you want your processor to support d-o-e, not just any
conformant serializer will do.
Cheers,
Wendell
======================================================================
Wendell Piez
mailto:wapiez(_at_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--