Subject: Re: [xsl] Functional programming in XSLT From: Jeni Tennison <mail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2001 05:07:34 +0000 |
Hi Mike, >> Alexey Gokhberg wrote: >> The current proposal for <exsl:function> does not conform to this >> rule. In particular, the <exsl:result> feature, with all rules >> governing its use, looks a little bit odd for me. > > You're being polite, I think it's weird! Your <uxsl:define>, I > think, is very close to my <saxon:function>. Which are the bits that you think are particularly weird/hard to implement/bound to cause trouble to newcomers to XSLT? Personally, I think quite a lot of complication is added for very little gain by allowing the template content of exsl:function to generate result nodes, i.e. allowing: <exsl:function name="foo"> <foo /> </exsl:function> as a shorthand for: <exsl:function name="foo"> <exsl:result><foo /></exsl:result> </exsl:function> The only other big difference with saxon:return (as I see it) is the fact that exsl:result is allowed within xsl:for-each, but that makes some things (e.g. keys in different documents) a lot easier. But perhaps there's something more? Cheers, Jeni --- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Functional programming in, Michael Kay | Thread | RE: [xsl] Functional programming in, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] retrive data from #1 xml , Jeni Tennison | Date | Re: [xsl] Testing for Parent Nodes , Jeni Tennison |
Month |