[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
> Uche Ogbuji wrote: > > >>I've used EXSLT. It is not that well designed > > > > How so? > > Ok, my intent was not to insult you or Dave or the other principal > contributors to EXSLT, and I guess I made an overstatement. EXSLT is > actually a fine piece of work. My main grudge goes to func:function > and is probably more related to its implementation in Xalan than to > its actual design, although I wish one could just convert a template > into a function instead of making a distinction between templates and > functions. Interesting, given that func:function is actually the seed that spawned EXSLT. EXSLT started off as a thread on xsl-list. Everyone already knew they wanted exsl:node-set and the like, but in discussions of XSLT 1.1, folks decided that something like func:function was important. As such proposals were presented and *thoroughly* debated on that very well-attended mailing list. As such, func:function is one of the more thoroughly reviewed entries. So again I think you may be overreacting from experience with one implementation. I use func:function a *lot* in 4Suite, and it works very well for me. > >>it is definitely not standard > > > > What do you mean? What do you call "standard"? > > No time to go through the archives so here is my "facile" answer: I > call standard a specification released by one of the major standard > bodies out there, such as W3C, ECMA, ISO, etc. I understand why this > may or may not be important to different people so no need to start a > big argument here, but if you can summarize your position in a > sentence or two go ahead. The position of *many* on this list is that there is a very high, ah, standard for calling something a "standard" and that, for example, W3C work product does not meet it /per se/, being that W3C is a mere industry consortium (in fact, the W3C is careful to say that hey produce "recommendations" not "standards". I happen to think that this strictness is a sound position, though I don't think it should bound all uses of the word "standard". That does mean, however, that it is not really meaningful to disparage something like EXSLT or SAX as "not a standard", because XSLT, RELAX NG, SOAP and other such technologies are also really only "standards" in the informal sense (notice: IIRC XML itself can be considered a true standard because there is an ISO annex that addresses it as an SGML subset). -- 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-x mptron/ Charming Jython - http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/java/library/j-jython.h tml 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=7 744
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|