Subject: Re: [xsl] current-dateTime() From: "Dimitre Novatchev" <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 19:30:50 -0700 |
> Yes, in that case you can get the function called. Once you > venture into the land of extensions, anything becomes possible :-) And you probably noticed from my other posts in this thread some guaranteed ways to sequence the XSLT transformation process without the need to use any extension functions at all :o) -- Cheers, Dimitre Novatchev --------------------------------------- Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence. --------------------------------------- To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk ------------------------------------- Never fight an inanimate object ------------------------------------- You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what you're doing is work or play On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Liam Quin <liam@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 08:04:45AM -0700, Dimitre Novatchev wrote: > > Just use an extension function with an argument that it ignores (but > > the XSLT processor has no way of knowing this) and call it every time > > with different argument value, for example: > > > > for $i in 1 to 1000000 > > return (ext:myTime($i), f:doSomething()) > > Yes, in that case you can get the function called. Once you > venture into the land of extensions, anything becomes possible :-) > > It was not the point I was trying to make, but maybe it is > not important. > > > Liam > > -- > Liam Quin, W3C XML Activity Lead, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ > http://www.holoweb.net/~liam/ * http://www.fromoldbooks.org/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] current-dateTime(), Liam Quin | Thread | Re: [xsl] current-dateTime(), Mukul Gandhi |
Re: [xsl] current-dateTime(), Liam Quin | Date | [no subject], Unknown |
Month |