Subject: Re: Saxon VS XT From: David_Marston@xxxxxxxxx Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2000 17:08:09 -0400 |
Paul Tchistopolskii says: >Sebastian, I apologize, but maybe you will provide me with >some particular usecase which can not be done >with current XT ( + Java )? How about anything using the key() function? >I think that I can do anything in XT + Java *and* XT + Java >solution will be faster than 'conformant' solution. Aaah, now it all becomes clear. You're saying that if you write all your own stylesheets, you can circumvent the missing parts in XT. Then you go on to claim that the missing parts won't stop you from generating the output you want. As noted in another thread, you must be limiting your wants when it comes to character encodings. Can (you + XT + Java) produce anything *I* want, if I say I want Katakana? My larger objection to what you say is that you are foreclosing one of the benefits of standards: portability of code, stylesheets in this case. If you wanted to grab any pieces of XSLT code off The Net or whatever, that code may be conformant but require features that XT doesn't have. If you want to hire others to write XSLT code for you, you have to teach them the limitations of XT, and that will reduce their productivity. Any time there's conformant example code being circulated, you have to review it against the limitations before you can use it. .................David Marston XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Saxon VS XT, Linda van den Brink | Thread | Re: Saxon VS XT, Paul Tchistopolskii |
Re: How to embed HTML in XML, Mike Brown | Date | RE: jdom, Kaganovich, Yevgeniy |
Month |