RE: saxon impressions

[Kay Michael <Michael.Kay@xxxxxxx>]

> 
> I am tryed saxon. Fine product!
> Fine documentaion. It has many extensions, that I really need 
> now, but I
> am don't like to use because it not standard.

I well understand your concerns. I try to avoid using the extensions myself,
if I possibly can! 

> 
> If I will use this extensions... What chance that it will be 
> implemented in standard/working draft?
>
 
I have no more influence than you do! Try writing to the editors and ask for
the features, explain why you need them.

I suspect some of my facilities are more likely to find their way into the
standard than others. Multiple output files is an obvious requirement and
I'm sure the standard will come up with a solution (though perhaps not in
the way SAXON does it); and some sort of grouping facility is a natural
extension - many people have asked for it. 

I doubt XSL will ever have "real" variables, because the designers see that
as a bad idea. There are good theoretical reasons for their decision, but
there are also good practical reasons the other way, and so far, allowing
updateable variables hasn't seriously compromised my implementation. (I've
been doing a lot of optimisation recently, there will be a much faster SAXON
available soon).

Mike Kay


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list