Re: following-sibling and xsl:sort

> > > Therefore, any problem, which has solution using the xxx:node-set()
> > > extension function should have a solution without using it.
> >
> > I tend to disagree with that statement.
>
> Me too. Turing completeness is not the same as closure over the data model.
> To take an obvious example, there is no way of creating a result tree that
> contains an unparsed entity, even though the data model allows unparsed
> entities to exist.
>
> Closer to the hypothesis in question, I don't believe it is possible in
XSLT
> 1.0 without the xx:node-set() extension to create a result tree containing
a
> namespace that is declared in neither the source document nor the
> stylesheet, if the result tree contains no element or attribute whose name
> is in that namespace.


Yes, Turing-completenes cannot help in the case when an object in the
data model simply can't be created by a transformation without
additional input (such as a copy of the object itself).

  Are there such cases still for XSLT2?


Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.