RE: XSLT 1.1 comments
> <saxon:function> looks just right, now I've looked it up. > > And I'm just hoping and guessing - again without research - > that implementing this feature is largely syntax-sugar - and if not, > let's make it optional. > It wasn't difficult to implement but it wasn't pure syntactic sugar either. There were three things that needed care: using positional arguments instead of named arguments in the call; preventing the function writing to the output tree; and ensuring that lazy evaluation of node-sets still worked in the case where a node-set was returned from a function. But apart from the questions of data typing mentioned earlier (and those are no worse than any other implications of data typing on XSLT), I don't think there are any reasons to regard the facility as being risky, or bad coding practice. 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