Your analogy does not mirror my point. Here's a better one. Assume a
working C program. Now I simply add function FooBar() into the source
code, and numerous other testing and debugged functions start returning
results that were different then they returned prior to my adding the
new function FooBar().
THAT is fragile.
Only functions that call FooBar() change. That's exactly the same as
xslt. The analogy is xsl:template match="FooBar" is a function
definition and <FooBar> is the function call. If you (re) define the
template that matches FooBar then the processing of FooBar elements
changes That's not Fragile, it's how it's expected to be, surely.
David
________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The
service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive
anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit:
http://www.star.net.uk
________________________________________________________________________
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--