Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math

Subject: Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math
From: Jeni Tennison <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2001 11:16:29 +0000
David Carlisle wrote:
> It seems to me that the current exslt draft mixes up two rather
> different things, and separating them out might help.
> One is a common namespace (or namespaces) for extension functions
> and a suggested list of initial functions. This is largely non
> controversial (I assume the existence of such a namespace isn't
> controversial at all, one could argue a bit about the exact list of
> functions) 
> Then there is a mechanism for defining functions with an XSLT-like
> language. This is a lot harder to spec out (as the thread has shown)
> and hiving that off to a separate document might help with getting a
> common namespace agreed.

Fair enough.  I have split EXSLT 1.0 - Common into two documents:

  EXSLT 1.0 - Common:
  EXSLT 1.0 - Functions:

EXSLT 1.0 - Common describes the exsl:node-set() and
exsl:object-type() functions. Are there any other common functions
that it should hold? Should the more basic set and math functions be
classed as common functions?

EXSLT 1.0 - Functions describes extension elements for user-defined
extension elements written in XSLT with EXSLT extensions.  There are
many open issues there, the two most important ones probably being:

  (a) whether it should adopt an extended XPath syntax along the lines
  of FXPath [see]

  (b) whether it should include a way of building up node sets with
  something along the lines of exsl:reference-of or exsl:result-set.

I plan to revise EXSLT 1.0 - Math and EXSLT 1.0 - Sets so that they no
longer include functions involving dynamic evaluation of strings as
expressions, hopefully before the weekend.


Jeni Tennison

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread