Re: XSLT 1.1 comments

  Implementations can provide this functionality *independent*
  of the language the XSLT processor is written in.

NO! They can't that is what I was trying to say.

The above is a description of saxon:node-set and friends
other implementations could choose to implement saxon's namespace full
of built in extensions and that would work as you describe.

But that kind of extension functionality is unchanged in 1.1.

what xsl:script is trying to do is give similar flexibility to
what currently in saxon or xt you would do


<xsl:value-of
xmlns:fudge="http://www.jclark.com/xt/java/the.full.java.name"
  select="fudge:randomMethodInThisClass($x)"/>

That is, saxon, xalan, xt, and friends can execute arbitrary java
methods that happen to be in your classpath. The namespace used for the
extension function directly points at at the java class (although not
directly at a particu;ar implemntation).

xsl:script gives an indirection allowing this to be more portable.
Rather than use a namespace directing you to a java class, use a random
namespace and then offere several possible bindings of that namespace to
implementations, java vbscript or whatever.

David

_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit
http://www.star.net.uk/stats.asp

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