Re: first proposal

[Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com>]

/ John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com> was heard to say:
| > > Maybe just 'import'. (The semantics of the CATALOG directive are more
| > > like xsl:import than xsl:include.)
| > >
| > > Yes, I think I vote for 'import' all by itself.
| > 
| > Works for me.
| 
| Umm.  Isn't it the case that the referenced catalog is not searched
| unless the current catalog does not satisfy the request?  This seems

Yes.

| to me like subclassing (the current catalog is a subcatalog of the
| referenced catalog), the Java term for which is "extend".  That's
| what I had in mind.

But the semantics of xsl:import happen to match as well, which is how
I got there. That is, if an XSLT processor finds a matching template
in the current stylesheet, it does not search imported stylesheets.

| How about "subCatalogOf"?

I think I'd prefer extend :-)

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman.Walsh@East.Sun.COM | Everything we love, no doubt, will pass
XML Technology Center     | away, perhaps tomorrow, perhaps a thousand
Sun Microsystems, Inc.    | years hence. Neither it nor our love for it
                          | is any the less valuable for that
                          | reason.--John Passmore