Subject: xsl:include vs. xsl:import From: "Evan Lenz" <elenz@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 08:28:49 -0700 |
Assuming that template rules of equal import precedence and priority would cause an XSLT processor to report an error, why would one ever need to use xsl:include instead of xsl:import? Is it precisely for debugging, where there is no intent to override template rules but only to ensure that there are no conflicts? Or perhaps readability--where the reader knows right off that nothing is being overridden? Are there any "technical" reasons for needing to do so? My suspicion is that any xsl:include elements could be replaced by xsl:import elements (as first children of the xsl:stylesheet element) without there being any change to the stylesheet's net behavior (the converse, of course, not being true). Where there _is_ a change, would that not be the result of bad stylesheet design, since it relies on implementation-specific quirks? Maybe I'm missing something. Thanks, Evan Lenz elenz@xxxxxxxxxxx XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
<xsl:import> file not found problem, Ryan Daigle | Thread | OM script -> xsl stylesheet, Pawson, David |
<xsl:import> file not found problem, Ryan Daigle | Date | OM script -> xsl stylesheet, Pawson, David |
Month |