Subject: RE: [xsl] The real harm is in functions with side effects (Was: Re: Using Extension Functions - Its Efficiency) From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 12:34:36 -0800 |
> > Portability is not the main issue with using extension functions. > > > > The portability of the message is the significance of XML. The > portability of stylesheets is often a secondary concern. Local True. Another reason to use XSLT is because the functional approach is superior for many transformation tasks. I often find, however, that the people who turn to extension functions are not necessarily people who appreciate functional programming and thus I assume they must be using XSLT for its portability (or hype-factor) rather than its elegance. Obviously not *all* of the people looking for extension functions fit into this category, but I'd bet a majority do. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] The real harm is in funct, Joshua Allen | Thread | [xsl] How do match/compare nodes?, vbarnard |
RE: [xsl] why exsl:node-set() is so, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Aligning left, center and, M. David Peterson |
Month |