Subject: Re: [xsl] xsltproc/LibXSLT - non-compliance?|
From: Michael Ludwig <mlu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 11:59:19 +0200
On Wed, Apr 30, 2008 at 02:56:09PM +0200, Manfred Staudinger wrote:What I posted in a parallel thread http://www.biglist.com/cgi-bin/wilma/wilma_hiliter/xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/200804/msg00515.html?line=8#hilite may well turn out to be such a non-conformance.
Please report it on the gnom xml list for libxml/libxslt, or using bugzilla, if it's a bug.
I don't think that libxslt is particularly more or less strictly conformant to the spec than other implementations I've tried.
I've yet to see a piece of software that's perfect; the questions to ask are, is it good enough to use, and if I report bugs, do they get fixed...
I'm happy with LibXSLT. I think it's much more than good enough to use. I could never do anything like that. It's very fast. Although I've found that depending on algorithm and input size (contrived examples, however), Saxon 9 may be significantly faster.
Anyway, for Perl, Python and PHP, there is only LibXSLT and Sablotron. And maybe Xalan-C++.