Subject: RE: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicle for XSLT extensions? From: "Kaganovich, Yevgeniy (Eugene)" <ykaganovich@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 00:41:12 -0800 |
: <xbind:module : name="a-language-independent-uri-that-refers-to-functionality"> : <xbind:function name="format"> : <xbind:param name="date" type="string" /> : <xbind:param name="format" type="string" /> : <xbind:return type="string" /> : <xbind:comment> : This function formats a date in ISO 8601 : according to the format string. : </xbind:comment> : <xbind:implementation : language="java" : package="java:com.example.datestuff.DateRoutines#format" : /> : <xbind:implementation language="javascript"> : ... : </xbind> : </xbind:function> : </xbind:module> : : <exsl:script implements-prefix="date" : xbind="a-language-independent-uri-that-refers-to-functionality" /> This looks very cool. I would suggest that it's better to group by languages rather than by functions: if I'm using a java-based processor, I'm not particularly interested in how the perl binding looks, but I would like to be able to distribute my implementation separately from the module description. <!-- can be made available on date-formatting-module-ns URI, e.g via RDDL --> <xbind:module name="date-formatting-module-uri"> <xbind:function name="format> <xbind:param name="date" type="string" /> <xbind:param name="format" type="string" /> <xbind:return type="string" /> <xbind:comment> This function formats a date in ISO 8601 according to the format string. </xbind:comment> </xbind:module> </xbind:package> <!-- comes with com.example.datestuff package (may or may not be downloadable from the same namespace uri) --> <xbind:bindings xbind="date-formatting-module-uri" laguage="java"> <xbind:implementation name="format"> <class src="java:com.example.datestuff.DateRoutines"/> </xbind:implementation> </xbind:implementations> Here, I assume that anything inside xbind:implementation is specific to the language for which binding is defined. I'm a little unclear about namespace usage in attributes, but it seems cleaner to store Java-specific information as values inside xbind:implementation, rather than its attributes. BTW, If it were Javascript binding, xbind:implementation may contain [a node with] actual Javascript code, not just external reference. Is that correct? - Eugene XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicl, Diamond, Jason | Thread | RE: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicl, Clark C. Evans |
RE: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicl, Clark C. Evans | Date | Re: [xsl] ANNOUNCE: Petition to wit, Jeni Tennison |
Month |