> -----Original Message----- > From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 6:15 PM > > If OOo stayed with saxon9.jar then any faults/improvements > would not be addressed.
I was never bitten by any nasty bug with Saxon-B but of course that's just me. What I'm wondering, though, is whether it is desirable to have some obscure corner-case bugs solved (small benefit) at the expense of parting with saxon proprietary extensions (big cost)? > Temporary trees, imported stylesheets and modes... though > admittedly not nearly as convenient as "next-in-chain". Temporary trees + modes are a maintenance nightmare: I know, I've been there. But often, Saxon extensions have a way of making it into the spec... any hope here? > But using extensions at any time is risky. I underscore that in my > class. I might start citing your predicament as another example of > why. I have three public classes coming up in the next three months > and I'll see what students have to say about the situation in which > you find yourself. Well, that's a way of looking at the problem, I suppose. Another way is to say that I'm not, as of this moment, in any kind of situation; I may have a problem in the distant future -- if: - I don't find a solution when (if) the problem does arise - my users have an irrepressible urge to upgrade OOo (and one lets them) - etc. In other words, I still think using next-in-chain in this particular context was very much worth it. As always, YMMV ;-) Regards, EB --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
