Re: XSLT 1.1 comments

> > Now you're talking.
> >
> > Is it not worth trying out this approach for a while before
> > diving in with the
> > XSLT 1.1 stuff?
> >
> It's completely orthogonal.

Not a bit.

> This is about accelerating the creation of
> agreed specifications for new extension functions; the XSLT 1.1 proposals
> are about increasing the portability of extension function implementations.

I get the idea we're talking different languages.

And why, pray tell, could the existing extension functions not be modified to 
use the new mechanism?  I have no problem renaming my ft:evaluate to 
std:evaluate.  I can't imagine why you wouldn't.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx               +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc.                         http://Fourthought.com 
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python



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