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

Re: [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math

Subject: Re: [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math
From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2001 09:30:50 -0700
sets in math
Wretchedly trying to catch up after my trips.

> David C. wrote:
> > As for what functions to stick in exslt I'd have a policy of if in
> > doubt add it. So in particular I'd probably start by suggesting all
> > the saxon ones. (Thus including saxon:function) This just gives a
> > namespace that isn't saxon specific that means that other
> > implementers can choose to implement these functions if they wish.
> > Similiarly of course they could suggest further functions to be
> > added.
> 
> Hmm... I guess that with that approach you wouldn't mandate that a
> processor had to support all the functions (in a particular module),
> but leave it up to the author to check whether each function was
> supported?

I don't like this one bit.  I think modules should be implemented 
all-or-nothing.  Probably we should try to arrange the module so that they 
would probably involve similar implementation techniques.

The one bit of trouble I could see that causing is a split of sets into one 
section that allows dynamic programming (the set/string parameters functions ) 
and another that doesn't (the set/set parameter functions).  But I'd want to 
hear from implementors that this dynamic programming is a problem in this case 
anyway.  Andrew has mentioned that it's a problem in the general case, but 
maybe this incidence is limited enough.

But I do think that if EXSLT picks up steam among implementers that we should 
strongly encourage adoption by entire modules.

> That sounds reasonable to me - it means that 'EXSLT conformant
> processors' doesn't mean anything, but it means that implementers can
> implement what they choose. (I was aiming for a middle ground where you
> could have a processor that was conformant to a *part* of EXSLT, and
> the modules were small enough for implementers to consider
> implementing.)

I think you came pretty close.  In implementing them, I was able to use a lot 
of cut-and-paste between function implementations in each module.


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx               +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc.                         http://Fourthought.com 
4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python



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


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.