XSLT 1.1 specifies that it will only consider Java and EcmaScript bindings. It seems to me that the extension bindings don't have to be language-specific. Why can't an XML-based binding be defined to standardize on a cross-language specification? (I think this is similar to thick vs. thin jdbc drivers, although I'm not very familiar with jdbc driver internals :) >From what I understand, the extension functions/elements are expected to return either primitive types (number, string, boolean), or XSLT-specific structures like nodeset, RTF, XPath expression... XML seems to be a great way to specify these structures. Another way of looking at this is: given that we know the set of objects/datatypes that can be returned by extensions (which I assume we know for each language), can a common format be defined for their serialization to XML? Continuing on this idea, similar bindings can be defined for all other representations of the XML Infoset data, such as SAX and DOM, which already have bindings for programming languages into them. Does this make sense? - Eugene 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