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

Subject: Re: [xsl] [exsl] EXSLT 1.0 - Common, Sets and Math
From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 16:25:35 +0000

David Carlisle wrote:
> As for what functions to stick in exslt I'd have a policy of if in doubt
> add it. So in particular I'd probably start by suggesting all the saxon
> ones. (Thus including saxon:function) This just gives a namespace
> that isn't saxon specific that means that other implementers can choose
> to implement these functions if they wish. Similiarly of course they
> could suggest further functions to be added.
I'm pretty happy with Jeni's suggestions so far - and glad you agree
with the idea of not postponing exsl:function till XSLT 2.0.

I think proposing the whole saxon function set might prove a bit
indigestible for non-saxon implementors, in terms of pride if nothing
else. Let's use it as an excellent kick-off spot, but let the exsl list
be a genuine community proposal.

I like Jeni's approach of defining extra functions as extension
functions, so basically anyone who's gone as far as impelementing
exsl:function can (I'm waving my hands in the air a bit here) somehow
incorporate the standard definitions and get them more or less for free,
with the option of hand-coding any that they wanted to optimise.


 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread