[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
P.S.
Sorry for this processor-specific question, but
?
I couldn't find that info in the docs.
Tobi
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Re: [xsl] N : M transformation
|
Subject: Re: [xsl] N : M transformation From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2003 13:38:11 +0100 |
P.S.
Sorry for this processor-specific question, but
does Saxon 6.5.2 support http://www.exslt.org/exsl/elements/document/
?
I couldn't find that info in the docs.
Tobi
I use the latest stable Saxon for example. I switched from saxon:document (IIRC) to XSLT 1.1 document. I could switch to EXSLT, but what I currently use works well, so there's no need to change. Again: it's up to each programmer to decide if he wants to rely on extensions or on drafts. I agree that well-specified extension features are a more stable base than W3C drafts, but I don't agree that the latter is the wrong choice in all situations.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, Tobias Reif | Thread | RE: [xsl] N : M transformation, Michael Kay |
| Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, Tobias Reif | Date | Re: [xsl] Omitting multiple namespa, J.Pietschmann |
| Month |
Keywords