RE: XSLT 1.1
> XSLT 1.1 specifies that it will only consider Java and > EcmaScript bindings. There is no XSLT 1.1 specification, only a requirements document. > 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? > Because there is no suitable cross-language definition of data types that it can refer to. SQL has exactly the same problem. If you make a call on my:proc(3.2) and proc is written in Java then the spec needs to say - where to look for a function called proc - what to do if it finds more than one - how to convert the argument 3.2 into the Java data type expected by the selected method (e.g. what if it expects a BigDecimal?) - how to convert the result of the selected method back to an XPath value. All these things are necessarily Java-specific. There are of course some things one can say that are not language-specific, and no doubt the spec, when it emerges, will try to achieve as much generality as possible. Mike Kay 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