Re: XSL with scripting

[James Clark <jjc@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
> 
> Flow Simulation <info@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> >Now we have seen the latest XSL draft, and scripting hasn't reappeared.

> >I think this one would be a simple yes/no.
...
> No, it isn't a simple question at all.

Quite so.

Extensibility (whether in the form of scripting or something else) will
get into XSL if and when the XSL WG reaches consensus on a mechanism for
providing extensibility.  Flaming the W3C process may be a lot of fun
but it won't help get extensibility into XSL. The way to help get
extensibility into XSL is to provide useful, constructive input to the
XSL WG that assists it in coming up with a design that it can reach
consensus on. At this stage, the kind of input I would find most useful
would be a representative selection of transformation problems that
can't be solved using the current XSL WD and that one might reasonably
expect to be able to solve with an extensibility mechanism. (If anybody
steps up to this, please supply actual source and result XML documents
so that there's no doubt exactly what the problem is.)

James



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list