Subject: Re: [xsl] RE: Designs for XSLT functions From: Joe English <jenglish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 08:17:02 -0800 |
"Michael Kay" wrote: > > > > > I think clearly separating the specification of the abilities: > > > > > > > > -> to statically define and statically > > > > invoke functions in XSLT, and > > > > > > > > -> to dynamically invoke functions > > I don't see any need for special syntax to invoke functions whose name is > decided at run-time. That can easily be done using a general-purpose > evaluate() extension that constructs XPath expressions from strings. An apply() function (which simply calls another function whose name is decided at runtime) would be easier to use than a general-purpose evaluate() routine though. Programmatically constructing a syntactically valid XPath expression can be tricky. Apply() would likely also be easier to implement and more efficient than evaluate(). --Joe English jenglish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Converting RSS to HTML, Ronan Brady | Thread | RE: [xsl] RE: Designs for XSLT func, Michael Kay |
[xsl] Converting RSS to HTML, Ronan Brady | Date | RE: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Michael Kay |
Month |