Re: [xsl] Time for an exslt for 2.0?

["M. David Peterson" <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx>]

Is this something that is possible to accomplish via the existing
EXSLT project path?  The impression I have is that maybe the interest
in this particular area has dropped off but I don't want to offend
anybody in that group by suggesting that this is the case.  Just that
this is the impression that I get.

What are the proper next steps for this?  It seems obvious that if its
possible to work through the existing project space then this would be
ideal.  Is this a possibility?

On 12 May 2005 12:35:52 +0100, Colin Paul Adams
<colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == M David Peterson <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>    David> Are you thinking along the same lines in which the original
>    David> EXSLT project (assuming that my understanding as to why the
>    David> original project was started) was focused towards, in
>    David> essence adding to the mix the instructions and functions
>    David> that were left out of the spec for various reasons or had
>    David> since been realized as necessary?
>
> Not necessarily instructions and functions - anything that promotes
> writing portable stylesheets.
> The two issue I mentioned are cases in point.
> Dmitre added saxon:memo-function="yes" attributes to some of his
> prime-number-calculating functions. When I looked at these, I promptly
> realised the benefit, and implemented my own attribute in gexslt with
> identical semantics. But this meant coding BOTH attributes within the
> function definition. As Dmitre pointed out, for two processors this is
> just about OK, but if more and more implementations were to do the
> same thing, it would be frightfully messy to read, and a real pain to
> have to keep adding new attributes for each new processor.
> And having a standard way of accessing environment variables is
> another pure gain on portability (otherwise, if you need this
> facility, yopu are going to have to do a lot of unecessary coding with
> xsl:use-when - it's possible, but a nightmare for maintenance).
>
> Then there are things in the XSLT 2.0 spec. that are left entirely to
> the implementation (such as collation names - this is actually under
> discussion on the qt-comments list at the moment). It might be useful
> to have a set of standard collation names with known properties.
> --
> Colin Adams
> Preston Lancashire
>
>


--
<M:D/>

:: M. David Peterson ::
XML & XML Transformations, C#, .NET, and Functional Languages Specialist