Subject: Re: [xsl] Is there a reason for not using XSLT 2.0 as a default From: "M. David Peterson" <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 08:40:43 -0700 |
As it turns out I was completely off my "interpretation rocker" in regards to the XSLT/FO WD draft split having anything to do with the current feelings towards XSLT 2.0 on Redmond campus. While I have gained a bit of a better understanding of things its probably best for me to do a bit more research before I comment any further... David, Michael, Thanks for helping bring a much needed perspective into things!!! Cheers :) <M:D/> On Wed, 09 Mar 2005 12:54:19 +0200, Oleg Tkachenko <oleg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > David Carlisle wrote: > > > Even if it had > > been a faithful implementation of that draft, releasing an implementation > > of a draft spec in a full non-beta release of a piece of software > > distributed to 90% of the world's desktops was a mistake > > Are you talking about XSLT 2.0 ? :) > > Microsoft learnt that the hard way and that's the reason both XSLT 2 and > XQuery are out. SQL Server will support some minimal "stable" part of > XQuery and that's it. Moreover, as many microsofties say nowadays, they > don't see much requests for client side declarative XML processing tools... > > -- > Oleg Tkachenko > http://blog.tkachenko.com > Multiconn Technologies, Israel > > -- <M:D/> :: M. David Peterson :: XML & XML Transformations, C#, .NET, and Functional Languages Specialist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Is there a reason for not, Oleg Tkachenko | Thread | RE: [xsl] Is there a reason for not, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] current context preceding, Karl Stubsjoen | Date | Re: [xsl] Is there a reason for not, Michael Champion |
Month |