Subject: RE: [xsl] user-defined types in something other than Schema? From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 21:42:36 -0000 |
> Is it fair to say that, in XSLT 2.0, type declaration > extensions are likely to have the same status that > extension functions had in XSLT 1.0? In particular, > a separate implementation for each XSLT vendor? Yes. > > Would it be reasonable for XSLT 2.0 to specify an XSLT > function API for type management (including type > declaration)? If the XSLT vendor has to implement > types anyway, would a standard interface increase > the implementation effort substantially? The XSL WG (and W3C generally) has been steering clear of APIs. The attempt to standardize extension function bindings in XSLT 1.1 was widely disliked, so I can't see it being attempted again. In any case, there's a need for a lot more vendor experimentation and experience before anyone really knows what is likely to work. > > In particular, if you're interested only in matching > based on type and not in validating, would you > require only the subset of the abstract model that > names each type, identifies its base type, and > provides type annotation for elements? > Yes, pretty well. To describe it in Saxon terms, all you need to do is: (a) attach type annotations to nodes in the source document. You can do this by using interfaces to the document builder. The type annotation is an integer, corresponding to a QName - you can allocate integers to QNames by calls on the NamePool service. (b) create a schema (a Java object that indexes type definitions by name) and register it with the Saxon Configuration. The Schema returns a SchemaType object when given the integer used as a type annotation. (c) implement the type definition objects. This object provides a method type.matchesItem(item) which returns true if the item (e.g. a node) is an instance of the required type. This gives you the "instance of" operator, which you can then use in your match patterns. In practice it's going to be a bit more complicated than that, but that's the view from the stratosphere. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] user-defined types in som, Erik Hennum | Thread | [xsl] XML / XSL Editors, António Mota |
RE: [xsl] user-defined types in som, Erik Hennum | Date | [xsl] for-each and summing based on, dsk |
Month |