[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Wishes for XSL revisions ...
Dear XSL designers/maintainers, please scrutinize your specification for orthogonality or lack thereof. I think you have put in too many special limitations. Here is a list of some: - result tree fragment is not a node set, requiring the node set function that just about anyone supplies but which produces only hassles figuring out what namespace this node-set function is in. - call-template has no mode attribute - Why should it be forbidden to construct the name of a template to call? - Why should it be forbidden to construct the mode argument? - Why should any qname have to be hard-coded? This only forces awkward choice forms onto the style sheet programmer where things could be done soo much simpler! I will probably have more of those as I go. If you make XSL a functional language, why don't you go all the way? regards -Gunther -- Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D. gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Medical Information Scientist Regenstrief Institute for Health Care Adjunct Assistant Professor Indiana University School of Medicine tel:1(317)630-7960 http://aurora.regenstrief.org 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
|