[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0

• To: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>
• Subject: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@f...>
• Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 22:56:18 -0600
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: Message from Erik Bruchez <erik@b...> of "Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:15:11 PDT." <3EE6202F.70704@b...>
• Sender: uche.ogbuji@f...

> I've used EXSLT. It is not that well designed

How so?

> it is definitely not standard

What do you mean?  What do you call "standard"?  You might want to take care 
and look at some very long past threads on this list before giving a facile 
answer.


> and implementations [expletive deleted] (in particular, Xalan 2.5.1 still
> has horrible bugs with func:function).

That's like saying all implementations of automobiles [expletive deleted] because the Ford 
Pinto used to catch fire a lot.


> I reckon that extending the function library fills a gap, but clearly
> XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 provides much more. For example, with EXSLT, you
> still have to say explicitly that you want to convert an RTF into a
> node-set. Try explaining that to an XSLT beginner!

True.  XSLT does not set out to change the core of XPath/XSLT (which would be 
required for node-set/RTF unification).  We do as best we can using 
modularization.  XPath NG (on which progress is unfortunately slow at the 
moment) does seek to match this unification, but plans to maintain the 
principle of modularization which Roger has expressed.


> Many of the major new features of XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0 cannot be
> addressed by library extensions. For example being able to express
> conditions and iterations in XPath is a HUGE plus from a syntactical
> point of view (aren't you tired of xsl:choose?).

Syntactic sugar is nice, but I don't think it justifies the enormous 
additional complexity of XSLT 2.0 / XPath 2.0.

I'm glad it works for you.  It doesn't work for may others, as you can easily 
tell in this thread.  As I've said often enough, forking can be a very healthy 
thing.  I wave to you from the other tine.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                                    Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net    http://4Suite.org    http://fourthought.com
XML Data Bindings in Python - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/06/11/py-xml.html
Introducing Examplotron - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-xmptron/
Charming Jython - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jython.html
The commons of creativity - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-think18.html
A custom-fit career in app development - http://www.adtmag.com/article.asp?id=7744

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>

• References:
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>

• Prev by Date: RE: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Next by Date: Re: modeling, validating and documenting an xml grammar
• Previous by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread