This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Re: Re: Re: Reliance on import precedence considered dangerous
- To: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev at yahoo dot com>
- Subject: Re: [xsl] Re: Re: Re: Reliance on import precedence considered dangerous
- From: Jeni Tennison <mail at jenitennison dot com>
- Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2001 13:14:19 +0000
- CC: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Organization: Jeni Tennison Consulting Ltd
- References: <20010217124738.7229.qmail@web6301.mail.yahoo.com>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Hi Dimitre,
>> David said that he had a real-life example of this problem.
>
> David said this was a problem -- not that this was useful.
I hope you're not implying that David would ever try to do anything
that wasn't useful?!? ;)
>> Having thought about it some more, the real issue is if both B & C
>> (which both import D and are both imported by A) override something
>> in D in different ways. I don't think(?) that a virtual attribute
>> would address this problem?
>
> It will, because there will not be a second imported identical
> stylesheet that precedes some overrides.
Sorry, I was talking here about:
B -- D
/
A +
\
C -- D
where B and C both contain the same named template. They both happen
to be overriding the same named template in D (which is how come they
have the same name), but that's really by the by. In terms of this
particular template, you can forget about D - it's not important. The
tree may as well look like:
B
/
A +
\
C
There are no identical stylesheets in this situation but the problem
(of a stylesheet no longer behaving as it did when it was standalone)
still occurs as the template in C overrides the template in B.
Cheers,
Jeni
---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list