On 29 March 2014 12:42, Ihe Onwuka <ihe(_dot_)onwuka(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 11:57 AM, Andrew Welch
<andrew(_dot_)j(_dot_)welch(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 4:48 PM, Andrew Welch
<andrew(_dot_)j(_dot_)welch(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
I was surprised that the content models of xsl:copy and xsl:copy-of
were different (by dint of the select attribute) in the first place.
They are still different, no? shallow vs deep.
On 28 March 2014 17:50, Ihe Onwuka <ihe(_dot_)onwuka(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com>
wrote:
I'm not sure what point you are making.
That the content models are still different (not just the select attribute).
The only other difference I see is that xsl:copy has a
use-attribute-set attribute and the xsl:copy-of doesn't.
I'd make them the same.
So if you made them the same, I'm guessing you would allow children in
xsl:copy-of rather than make xsl:copy empty - is that right? If so,
what would the child nodes in xsl:copy-of do?
--
Andrew Welch
http://andrewjwelch.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>
--~--