[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

[no subject]

[no subject]
I agree, that not having bindings for languages like Java would
achieve higher levels of portability.

I also read Appendix C of the XSLT 1.1 WD. It's pretty complex than
what I thought.

I am sorry for putting up an useless argument, and I withdraw my point.

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:46 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> It's a lot more than three pages. See Appendix C of
>
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt11/
>
> And after the controversy in 2001, I don't think the WG will want to get its
> fingers burnt again.
>
> Take a look at some of the correspondence, for example
>
> http://xsl.markmail.org/search/?q=Java%20language%20bindings%20petition


-- 
Regards,
Mukul Gandhi

Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.