Re: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicle for XSLT extensions? (fwd)

["Clark C. Evans" <cce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Steve, you failed to address any of the points I made below.

 a) The functionality is the primary object, and it
    identified by an opaque, language independent URI
    that is unique in the current context.

 b) That the implementations and/or instructions for
    binding to an implementation need not be in 
    the stylesheet itself, perferably it is a
    seperate xml structure independent of XSLT and
    re-useable by other specifications.

 c) The the method for obtaining an implementation of
    this functionality not be singluar, that is, only
    provided via xsl:script.  Perhaps even allowing for
    functions to be used with only a namespace binding;
    assuming that an implementation is either built-in,
    in a local catalogue, or perhaps downloadable via RDDL.
    
 d) That the identifying URI also be coupled with a
    IDL like description of the module.  

 e) Perhaps even the identifying URI is required to be a
    a globally unique URL that can be used to fetch via RDDL 
    a catalogue of implementations, etc.  But this may 
    be too restrictive.

Thanks!  Clark


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