Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 or XSLT 1.0 -- which is more elegant? From: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 12:48:41 +0200 |
Hi Dimitre, On mar, 2005-04-19 at 20:23 +1000, Dimitre Novatchev wrote: > With XSLT 2.0 I can have expressions like: > > f:pow(sum(f:map(f:flip(f:pow(),10), 1 to 10)), 0.1) > > or > > f:transform-and-sum(f:flip(f:substring-before(), '*'), > data(/*/*/@colwidth)) > > > or > > f:map(f:round-half-to-even(f:sqrt(2, 0.000001)), 0 to 13) > > > These are really elegant compared to the xslt 1.0 code necessary to > produce the same result. > > Another reason I find XSLT 2.0 more elegant than XSLT 1.0 is that > there isn't anymore any need to use an xx:node-set() extension > function. > > What is really not elegant at all in XSLT 2.0 is the impossibility to > define user data types inline in a stylesheet -- forcing the > programmer to artificially separate in different files type definition > from type usage makes XSLT 2.0 rather unique... :( > > Of course, one would also like to see nested sequences, type classes > and type equations... I won't argue that XSLT 2.0 doesn't bring useful features and I must admit I am using it punctually, but I consider that the flaws of the PSVI based architecture promoted by XSLT 2.0 generally outweigh the benefit of these features and that's what prevent me from using it on a large scale. Of course, that's a decision which is very subjective and even personal since it's a trade-off between architectural principles and concrete features :-) ... Eric -- Carnet web : http://eric.van-der-vlist.com/blog?t=category&a=Fran%C3%A7ais ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Eric van der Vlist http://xmlfr.org http://dyomedea.com (ISO) RELAX NG ISBN:0-596-00421-4 http://oreilly.com/catalog/relax (W3C) XML Schema ISBN:0-596-00252-1 http://oreilly.com/catalog/xmlschema ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 or XSLT 1.0 -- w, Michael Kay | Thread | Re: [xsl] mixing it up: REST+XML Na, M. David Peterson |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 or XSLT 1.0 -- w, Dimitre Novatchev | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 2.0 or XSLT 1.0 -- w, Dimitre Novatchev |
Month |