Colin Paul Adams wrote:
Now, that is assuming that ex:error-state is an
instruction. And indeed, you created it as such.
So if ex:error-state is an instruction, then it should
expect to see errors caused by evaluating variables within
that instruction.
But you seem to be arguing that the error trapping should
be lexically associated. In which case it should be part
of a declaration, not an instruction.
Yes, I misused "lexicaly". I had in mind the simplest
case:
<xsl:variable name="v" .../>
<ex:error-safe>
<ex:try>
<xsl:sequence select="$v"/>
You are right, this is instead related to the "sequence
construction".
But my point was that because the variable declaration is
not evaluated in the sequence constructor of the ex:try, the
error it could raise should not be caught (even if a
processor can evaluating the value of the variable while
evaluating the seq ctor).
Regards,
--drkm
_____________________________________________________________________________
Ne gardez plus qu'une seule adresse mail ! Copiez vos mails vers Yahoo! Mail
http://mail.yahoo.fr
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--