Re: A Modest Proposal for the Re-inflation of XPath to an XM
Vun Kannon, David <dvunkannon@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > A Modest Proposal for the Re-inflation of XPath to an XML Syntax > [...] Nice idea. I doubt whether it would be acceptable as part of the XSLT draft - and more to the point, whether it _should_ be included. Instead I would consider defining XSLT in two levels. The current draft is the "machine language" level. It might even make sense to omit some things from it (attribute sets? modes?). The other level is a "high level" one. It would include anything omitted from the lower level, loops (side effect free!), something along the lines of your proposal, and whatever other constructs which would turn out to be common/useful for XSLT stylesheet writing. The transformation from the "high level" to the "low level" would be specified, obviously, in XSLT. The "low level" version of this sheet would serve as the formal specification of the high level language. Probably this would be generated from a high level sheet, though, after a period of bootstrapping. This has advantages for both XSLT processor implementors and for XSLT style sheet writers. As things stand, there's an inherent conflict between the need to keep the language simple and efficiently implementable and the need to make it friendly and support good software engineering practices. Of course, all this can wait until XSLT 1.0 rolls out the door. But it would make a pretty good direction for XSLT 2.0, IMVHO. Have fun, Oren Ben-Kiki 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