Re: using default params?

David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> better to use node-set on systems that support it.
> select="xt:node-set($foo)"/>

yes, sure, but of course I would prefer very much not to use an extension...
 
> > and the same goes for use-attribute-sets: why isn't it possible to use
> > a computed name for this parameter ?? 
> pass

I  assume that means that you can't comment on this

> > After an initial excitement over XSLT I'm now in the state where it
> > feels a bit like TeX:
> 
> You do know how many thousands of hours I've contributed to latex
> support don't you?, By `like TeX' you must mean that as a
> compliment... :-)

yes, sure, I was often amazed about what you managed to do with tex.  
 
> > Why didn't they simply use a full
> > featured scheme or clisp for the style language...
> 
> They did use scheme. It was called dsssl.

Sure... that's of course the reason fo my comment....

> No one used it because it had too many (

which is an exceptionally stupid argument IMHO
 
> Actually some people (including me) did use it, and dsssl-list is still
> reasonably active, but it's just so much easier to type
> <this>...</this> than (this...) that all the hype is with XSL.

:-) By the way, is dssl a full fledged implementation of scheme
(tailrecursive, closures, you-name-it...) ??? If yes, it's a shame
that xslt is so weak in comparison, and is becoming the standard while
dssl doesn't play a role in the web/xml part of the game.

(this is of course completely off-topic for a xsl list, sorry.)

        jtl


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list