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

Re: Support for lookaround regexp in XSLT -- any time

Subject: Re: Support for lookaround regexp in XSLT -- any time soon?
From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 18:24:46 +0100
Re:  Support for lookaround regexp in XSLT -- any time
thx for the background info, its useful and interesting to hear about.

btw

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regular_expression

does a good job at identifying regex specs/docs

but I would argue that perl6

https://github.com/perl6/specs/blob/master/S05-regex.pod

does the best job at unambiguously defining ... though this regex is
not your grandad's regex.

back to regex in XML land ... to add a datapoint: I think the only oft
repeated shortcoming of regex in XML, is lack of lookahead/lookbehind

J



On Fri, Mar 1, 2013 at 11:40 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> unsure about the original reason to restrict regex, as it seems to
>
> just confuse people when a regex they lovingly crafted elsewhere
> doesn't work (not that the various java, Perl, etc schisms help).
>
> I don't know the history in full, but I think there were several reasons XSD
> adopted a "minimal" regex subset:
>
> (a) they wanted to be sure it could be widely implemented using existing
> regex engines (i.e. a highest common factor approach)
>
> (b) they wanted to exclude anything that didn't make sense in an
> international Unicode context (so things like word boundaries were
> immediately suspect)
>
> (c) they wanted to make sure that what they included was well specified.
> Finding solid specifications of regex constructs is remarkably difficult;
> there's a culture of very informal specification. Many times when adding
> constructs to the XPath spec, we've had to do empirical tests on existing
> regex engines such as PCRE to see how they actually handle edge cases, and
> very often we find differences between different engines that couldn't be
> guessed from the documentation. For example, there's a sorry history of
> patches to the spec regarding the handling of a newline character appearing
> as the last thing in the input. It's a shame when a feature gets left out
> because we can't decide what it should do in edge cases, but the standards
> process tends to lead to people asking such questions and expecting answers.
>
> Michael Kay
> Saxonica

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.