Subject: Re: [xsl] 'nother xslt2 engine From: "M. David Peterson" <m.david@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 16:28:18 -0800 |
I discovered this same info after looking through there site... I did'nt see any direct reference as to their plans in this regard but I did'nt do a thourough scan either...It's not schema-aware.
Is there a real benefit in releasing a so called XSLT 2.0 processor that is not fully compliant with the draft you released over a year ago AND with several 1.0 based elements and functions from the 1.0 draft released in 1999 missing as well! Releasing a press release suggesting intent to deliver is one thing but with a specification that, as you suggested last Auguest, may not reach final recommendation for at least another year I am having a hard time understanding why a release with so much of the Nov 2003 specification missing would not be at VERY LEAST labeled an early beta at best and more realistically an alpha release.XPath 2.0 Functions Support <snip/>
XSLT 2.0 Functions Support <snip/>
Coming back to the real world of XSLT 2.0 compliant processors -- Dr. Kay, one of the "missing" portions of one of the projects I have worked on over the last 8 months (AspectXML.org) is the ability to use Schema to validate the input, the mapping, and then the output of the XSLT 1.0-based Aspect weaving engine. One of the things I see as great potential with Saxon-SA (or any other XSLT 2.0 Schema-Aware compliant processor that may become available in the future) is to introduce at the Aspect Oriented Software Development level the ability to validate every line of code that may be introduced via cross cutting concerns and to ensure that choices can be made at run time what to do when the code does'nt validate (e.g. stop the process, clean up the code to conform to the standards set forth and continue, ignore it all together, etc...) against a given schema, be it a static Schema that exists on the file system or a dynamically woven schema that is then used to further validate dynamically woven aspects. With IBM putting as much time and money into the development of tools for AOSD as well as an every increasing allocation of shelf space at Barnes & Noble and Borders & there UK-based counterparts for AOSD related titles (my good friend Russ Miles - who was the original creator of the idea for AspectXML of which we then joined forces to build - just finished the AspectJ Cookbook - An Oreilly Cookbook to me says a lot about where OReilly feels a particular technology is already or is heading towards...) I have this sense that utilizing the advanced features available in Saxon-SA coupled with Schema and AspectXML could truly revolutionize the way software is built, validated for conformance to particular standards, archived and indexed for use at a later date within other projects.. and the list goes on and on.
It's a good question, and I think it's still quite early days to tell, because Saxon is certainly not using the schema information to anything like its full potential at this stage.
The biggest advantage I have found so far comes from result document
validation: if your stylesheet generates invalid output, you get diagnostics
that point you straight at the line number containing the error. A simple
thing, but I think it can greatly speed up the process of developing a
stylesheet that produces correct output.
Michael Kay
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] 'nother xslt2 engine, Michael Kay | Thread | RE: [xsl] 'nother xslt2 engine, Michael Kay |
RE: [xsl] problem matching attribut, Evan Lenz | Date | Re: [xsl] Dynamic processing of xml, Brian Grainger |
Month |