Re: Saxon VS XT

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Sebastian Rahtz 

> Jobin, Eric writes:
>  > I've been having an arguments with a co-workers about Saxon versus XT.   He
>  > believes that XT should be "THE" tool while I argue that Saxon has all the
>  > power and flexibility.  What do you think?
> 
> There is no contest, unless/until XT either gets completed by James,
> or someone else takes the code and releases a complete (eg)
> openXT. How can you live with a processor which does not implement the
> whole spec?

How can I live without  5(?)  XSLT  features not implemented by XT ????

Sebastian, I apologize, but maybe  you will provide me with 
some particular usecase which can not be done 
with current  XT ( + Java ) ?  

I think that I can do anything  in XT + Java *and*  XT + Java 
solution will be faster  than  'conformant' solution. 

This 'conformance' dance is exciting, but I still think  that 
it is XT that has no competition ( at least as 'the embeddable 
XSLT engine' area ). By design, by implementation and by 
common sense. 

Rgds.Paul.

PS. Please note than it was you who placed it this way - not me. 

PPS. I'll be glad if XT will be 100% conformant but I'll be glad *not* 
because I'll start using the missing ( almost useless ) features, 
but only because this will allow me to say: "XT is 100% conformant" 
to those lost souls who are self-limiting themselves with pieces 
of paper published on some website.




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