Re: [xsl] What is exciting in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] parameters in XSLT 2.0)

Subject: Re: [xsl] What is exciting in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] parameters in XSLT 2.0)
From: James Fuller <jim.fuller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2005 09:42:39 +0200
Dimitre Novatchev wrote:

>>   James> so libraries can be built up?
>>This is a stylesheet (module) that has only built-in templates, and
>>so, if invoked as the principal stylesheet, will not call the
>>But if included or imported into another stylesheet, then indeed the
>>function might be called from other templates.
>>Colin Adams
>>Preston Lancashire
>>I think James is asking here if the above stylesheet can be a part of
>>a *compiled* library.

thx Dimitre; yes, this was the question.

though after thinking about it...its potentially dangerous to provide a
mechanism that depends on some compiled stylesheet...slippery slope to
incompatibility, we still need to 'bring in' functionality under the
auspices of xsl:import/xsl:include and namespaces, though it might be
useful to delineate a function library with something like an
xsl:library element within a stylesheet, which explicitly associates
functions with a namespace and provides some sort of meta name/data,
which defines its invokation as well( e.g. mylibrary:function() ).

<xsl:library name="mylibrary" xmlns="";>



how to deal with things like versioning, overloading, etc all would have
to be thought about...

In addition, there is also always problems of absolute/relative
addressing with such things... maybe there is some sort of 'packaging'
requirement with XSLT that is needed, instead of thinking along lines of
compiled stylesheets, based on zip.

just thinking out loud.

cheers, Jim Fuller

Current Thread