[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)
> > 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. > > Excuse me. On what exactly do you base this assertion? 4XSLT > (http://fourthought.com/4Suite) also conforms, and I understand that Xalan 1.0 > does as well. I wouldn't be surprised if there were others that do. After I realized that SAXON ( which is very good engine) makes hidden RTF->node-set typecast ( the thing MS were blamed for ), I feel not comfortable when somebody says 'conformant XSLT engine' in public place. See the stylesheet from the letter: "Conformance. SAXON & XT" I mean you can be implementing 100% of the functions, but how conformant are you ? Again, my assumption is that XT is conformant, asking for explicit node-set typecast. Because I don't understand why the distinction between node-set and RTF have jumped into the draft ( and so far no rationale was given ) I'm assuming that the editor of the XSLT draft ( who is also author of XT ) knows better. This could be bug in XT, of course. But if not - SAXON is not conformant. If it is not a bug in XT and your engine does something other than rejecting the stylesheet - your engine is also not conformant. Right? I think all vendors who are claming 100% conformance to the XSLT paper really meant : "we *think* we are 100% conformant - we have not bother to make sure". Rgds.Paul. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|