Re: Future XSLT extensions. document(). Summary.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Scott Sanders <ssanders@xxxxxxxxxx>


> Didier said:
> I am now too tired to argue and will just express an opinion. I totally
> disagree with you on (C). The actual document() function is and will be
> tremendously useful for XML based web services.
> 
> I am in total agreement.  The document() function is THE MOST USEFUL item in
> XSLT, unless you count the entire concept of XSLT.  I am defining screens in
> XML, and process them through XSLT.  

I guess 99% of XSLT users are doing this.

> Any listbox that needs to be filled is  filled using the document() function to 
> get that list from the database.

Are you saying that XSLT has a standard way of "getting list from the 
database" ?

Very interesting.  Could you please tell me what is the syntax 
of XSLT document() you are using to access the database?

Would it work in more than one environment? If it will work 
only in particular environment isn't it just a vendor-specific
extension? 

> Without the document() function, XSLT is extremely limited.

Is that possible to get some examples of using document() 
in the form other than document(URI) then ?  ( Once again, 
nobody is saying that document(URI) should die. 
But document() is much more than just document(URI) ).

Rgds.Paul.



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