Scott,



At 11:42 AM 10/2/2007, you wrote:
(XSLT 1.1 argument aside here...)
According to Michael Kay's XSLT 2nd Edition Programmer's Reference:

"In the draft XSLT 1.1 specification, the result tree fragment is no
longer a separate data type, but is merged into the node-set data type.
A tree is manipulated in the form of a node-set containing one node, the
root of the tree."

So it looks like you're home free to slice and dice your variable
content.

Hm, I checked the spec and you're right, my recollection erred.



This does make conformance questions even dicier for stylesheets 
claiming to be XSLT 1.1. It never made Rec status, so it's not a 
standard -- but inasmuch as it does away with the restrictions on 
RTFs, it can't be considered a simple set of "extensions" to 1.0 
either (since 1.0 mechanisms like function-available() won't help to 
set up fallback processing).



This is another reason to avoid it, I'm afraid, at least if you're 
concerned with standards-conformance and (more to the point) 
portability. It's very nicely dressed, but not very well-behaved. :->



Cheers,
Wendell


======================================================================
Wendell Piez                            mailto:wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Mulberry Technologies, Inc.                http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street                    Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207                                          Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD  20850                                 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
  Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================