Subject: [xsl] Wishes for XSL revisions ...|
From: Gunther Schadow <gunther@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:58:33 -0500
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.
- Why should it be forbidden to construct the name of a template to call?
- Why should it be forbidden to construct the mode argument?
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?
-- 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