RE: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)

Thanks Ben, that's a very comprehensive answer.

Lee

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Ben Robb [mailto:Ben@xxxxxxxxxx]
 Sent: 17 October 2000 11:07
 To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
 Subject: RE: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)
 
 
 Lee,
 
 You are confusing the (non-conformant) MSXML released with IE5 
 (version 2)
 with the latest MSXML (version 3). MSXML v3 is currently in final beta
 stages, and has been pretty much compliant for the July and September
 releases. The two are different enough that we class them as seperate
 products.
 
 MSXML did introduce some non-conformant tags (eg. 
 <xsl:script>), but they
 were removed before the first release (January) of MSXML3. I 
 believe that
 there are some extension tags, under the msxml namespace, but that is
 allowed within the W3C spec, and occurs with XT and SAXON as well...
 
 Going back to your original question - "which processor should 
 I use in a
 production environment?"... if you are most interested in 
 conforming to the
 spec, then MSXML3 and SAXON are the only two products which currently
 conform. XT fell back (because James Clark was a little busy editing a
 couple of the w3c specs *grin*, and as far as I know no one took up his
 offer to finish it). There are some others on the market now 
 (Unicorn, Xalan
 etc), but I've not really played with those enough to make an informed
 judgement.
 
 Benchmarks are only just starting to come out, and it seems 
 that MSXML3 has
 the edge on speed. However, SAXON does have some very useful extension
 functions, and there are some things you simply cannot do 
 using standard
 XSLT, so SAXON extensions become essential [though you are 
 doing some fairly
 arcane things by then, so the extensions are more "useful" as 
 shortcuts for
 difficult XSLT syntax].
 
 None of the products are yet "supported" in the traditional 
 sense; however,
 with Mike Kay (SAXON), James Clark (XT, and editor of the w3c 
 XSLT spec),
 Andy Kimball and Jonathan Marsh (Microsoft) all regular 
 contributors to this
 list, it sometimes seems as if XSLT is the best supported 
 language there
 is...
 
 Ben
 
 -----Original Message-----
 From: Pollington, Lee (ELSLON) [mailto:lee.pollington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
 Sent: 17 October 2000 10:38
 To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
 Subject: RE: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)
 
 
 I may be wrong but I thought it also introduced it's own 
 elements into the
 XSL namespace - that's not very conformant is it?
 
 
  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
 


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