On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, Joel E. Denny wrote: > On Thu, 8 Dec 2005, Joel E. Denny wrote: > > > > I recommend asking the people of the XSL list [1] about how the most > > > XSTL processors have implemented this. Would be good to go the de facto > > > way here if this is an 'implementation defined' issue. > > > > > > [1] [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Thanks for the suggestion. I will pursue this. > > I have started a thread over there. It has the same subject and is dated > Dec 9.
Daniel, I have received a response from Michael Kay. He claimed that both forward and back references among keys are legal in XSLT 1.0 by virtue of not being specifically banned. On the other hand, he noted that he hasn't seen it done very often. I'm not sure how relevant this is to libxslt right now, but he also pointed out that XSLT 2.0 discusses such references explicitly. I found it encouraging that libxslt's forward key references should be portable. Although back references would offer some organizational flexibility, I'm not sure they would offer any additional functionality, so I'm happy without them. I would like to see forward key references remain a permanent feature. If you believe this is not right for libxslt, let me know and I will not ask again. Otherwise, how can I help? If you want a regression test, do you prefer a simple combination of XML, XSL, and expected output? Or do you prefer a cvs diff? Thanks. Joel _______________________________________________ xslt mailing list, project page http://xmlsoft.org/XSLT/ [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/xslt
