The recent XSLT draft...
Hi. I normaly find myself in the position on this list of complaining about features or lack thereof within the XSL spec, and have knocked the W3C on more than one occasion, but I have to say that I really like some on the stuff being thrown into the XSLT spec., although I'm still not grokking some of it. I love the creative thoguth behind id-inverse, and was thinking that it could be useful for indicating the items linking/referencing an element. Say for instance all the elements indicating "Back to Top" referencing an anchor. I've posted seperately on keys, as I think they might be cool if I understood exactly what they are :/ Doc and docRef... anybody in English please?.... Same bag as key... I think I smell something cool, but it's not clicking as described in the spec. The generate-id I think can be a real life save from my experience playing with HTCs. For establishing concrete relationships between generated elements it's beautiful. Woohoo! For mod... we can now produce balanced tables easily :) And I like the general effort that's been made to ensure that authors will rarely need to escape to external code for functionality, and in this vein I think the new approach to functions a far better way of doing it rather than just the previously concived xsl:script. It also appears as if this mechanism may more robustly support XSL extensions. I would have liked to see ECMAScript support mandated so as to give a common platform that authors can know is supported. I love the simple idea of named templates, although I see some (maybe necessary) cross-over into effectively creating FOs, that might best be covered in an XSLF spec... I need to think more on this point. The named attribute sets.... YES!..... I was having to hack an implimentation of this with ASP constants previously, and we now have a way of managing "style classes". As for the param-variables.... is this in fact the beginning of the end for ASP?... thinking out loud... is the function extensions worked with hooking up to COM interfaces (or whatever) then I *think* the likes of ASP could go right out the window. I realise that this is just an "I like" list, but I'm concious of the fact that my posts are often an "I don't like" list so thought it important to note the change in the prevailing wind. Now if only I could get my hands on a parser that can be easily instantiated from script that supports XSLT, the MSXML parser would suddenly look a lot less attractive. Anybody see any reasons why MS couldn't simply release a new DLL bringing the newer support to their parser? Cheers Guy. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
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