Subject: RE: [xsl] xsl:script: functions written in XSLT From: Kay Michael <Michael.Kay@xxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 10:03:30 -0000 |
> I was wondering about this when I first saw saxon:function : > Is there really > any difference between that and named templates? If not, then > why do we need both? > Yes, that worried me too before I introduced saxon:function; my first thought was to allow some kind of mapping of an XPath function call to a named template. I came to the conclusion that a named template is a specialised kind of function whose syntax is designed on the assumption that its purpose is to construct a tree, and that bending this syntax to allow it to return other kinds of value would be very messy. The "two language" approach, XSLT+XPath, with the two languages having very different syntactic and semantic conventions, is always going to lead to some boundary problems where the two meet. Mike Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] xsl:script: functions wri, Jeni Tennison | Thread | [xsl] calling template with paramet, Heinz R., ITS P E320 |
Re: [xsl] Urgent please (forgot som, David Carlisle | Date | RE: [xsl] Urgent please, Julian F. Reschke |
Month |