[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: Feature Request: a fail condition for
Re: Feature Request: a fail condition for
Subject: Re: Feature Request: a fail condition for <xsl:if> From: Eduardo Gutentag <Eduardo.Gutentag@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 14:49:22 -0800 (PST) |
If you look at the issues in http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/WD-xsl-19981216.html (2.7.11.1) you'll see this is already an issue. Some time ago I proposed to the WG to use either if or when, but not both, so that you could use <xsl:when> or <xsl:choose> <xsl:when></xslwhen> <xsl:when></xsl:when> <xsl:otherwise></xsl:otherwise> </xsl:choose> (or use if instead of when above). This, and your proposal, I'm sure, will be discussed shortly. BTW - I much prefer when and otherwise to avoid any confusion as to the ifelse-ness of a repeated when inside choose. Eduardo >----- Begin Included Message -----< Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 16:30:50 -0500 From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: Feature Request: a fail condition for <xsl:if> To: "XSL List" <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> I'd like to see the use of <xsl:otherwise> as an "else" in the <xsl:if> test construct: <xsl:if test=""> ... <xsl:otherwise> ... </xsl:otherwise> </xsl:if> As well, a backward incompatible change would be to rename <xsl:otherwise> to <xsl:else>, then we would have: <xsl:choose> <xsl:when test=""> ... </xsl:when> <xsl:when test=""> ... </xsl:when> <xsl:when test=""> ... </xsl:when> <xsl:else> ... </xsl:else> </xsl:choose> and <xsl:if test=""> ... <xsl:otherwise> ... </xsl:otherwise> </xsl:if> Alternatively (no pun intended), perhaps just remove the existing <xsl:if> construct entirely and force people to use <xsl:choose>, substituting the existing "when" with "if": <xsl:choose> <xsl:if test=""> ... </xsl:if> <xsl:if test=""> ... </xsl:if> <xsl:if test=""> ... </xsl:if> <xsl:else> ... </xsl:else> </xsl:choose> The above gives the impression, I feel, of a if-elseif-elseif-else block. I think that having an "if" without an "else" will be confusing to people, and perhaps just recasting the current "choose" construct into a multi-part "if" construct will suffice. ............ Ken -- G. Ken Holman mailto:gkholman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Crane Softwrights Ltd. http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/ Training: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/schedule.htm Resources: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/resources.htm Shareware: http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/s/shareware.htm Next XSL Training (see training link): WWW8 - 1999-05-11 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list >----- End Included Message -----< XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Feature Request: a fail condition f, G. Ken Holman | Thread | Re: Feature Request: a fail conditi, Tyler Baker |
Feature Request - Node Set Processi, G. Ken Holman | Date | Re: More entity confusion and my op, Chris Maden |
Month |
Keywords