Re: On loss of integrity with xsl:script...

Subject: Re: On loss of integrity with xsl:script...
From: Paul Prescod <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 14:15:14 -0500
Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> If however, we had a script tag, that we could escape to for those marginal
> but essential tasks, might we not have exactly that, an escape. Something
> outside of XSL? In this way XSL could retain its "purity", and be
> implimented where needed in a robust, simple form, unadulterated, but still
> catering for expedience outside of the XSL language itself with the script
> tag.

I acknowledge the need for us to have a scripting capability despite the
fact that this costs us some rigor and robustness. I strongly agree with
David Carlisle's point that this should be done in a manner that 

 a) fits XSL's processing model
 b) discourages misuse
 c) encourages efficient implementation
 d) cleanly segments the scripting from the declarative stuff

I think that the xsl:functions mechanism does all of these things.

I would not be opposed to a normative description of exactly how to use
JavaSscript in WD-XSLT implementations but I would probably oppose a move
to restrict embedded scripts to only Javascript. I also oppose an
xsl:script element that would allow you to insert scripting any old place
you felt like it.

> Personaly I find myself playing both roles in my working life, so I'm
> merely expressing how I might like to use XSL. There are times when I want
> XSL to be highly optomised, and times when it doesn't matter. 

Note that if a language is hard to optimize, it is hard to optimize, no
matter how you are using it today. It is brutally difficult to write
optimizers that recognize which language features have been used and
switch optimization strategy based on the feature use. It isn't impossible
but the XML world doesn't have the kind of resources that JVM vendors do

 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself

Diplomatic term: "Emerging Markets"
Translation: Poor countries. The great euphemism of the Asian financial
             meltdown. Investors got much more excited when they thought 
they could invest in up-and-comers than when they heard they could invest 
in the Third World.(Brills Content, Apr. 1999)

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread