Subject: RE: [xsl] Wishes for XSL revisions ... From: Jonathan Yue <jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2001 12:15:44 -0800 |
I agree "Go all the way" for a programming language. XSL even does not have a "break" statement. For a simple thing, using XSL has to write piles of piles of code. -----Original Message----- From: Gunther Schadow [mailto:gunther@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2001 6:59 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xsl] Wishes for XSL revisions ... Dear XSL designers/maintainers, please scrutinize your specification for orthogonality or lack thereof. I think you have put in too many special limitations. Here is a list of some: - result tree fragment is not a node set, requiring the node set function that just about anyone supplies but which produces only hassles figuring out what namespace this node-set function is in. - call-template has no mode attribute - Why should it be forbidden to construct the name of a template to call? - Why should it be forbidden to construct the mode argument? - Why should any qname have to be hard-coded? This only forces awkward choice forms onto the style sheet programmer where things could be done soo much simpler! I will probably have more of those as I go. If you make XSL a functional language, why don't you go all the way? regards -Gunther -- Gunther Schadow, M.D., Ph.D. gschadow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Medical Information Scientist Regenstrief Institute for Health Care Adjunct Assistant Professor Indiana University School of Medicine tel:1(317)630-7960 http://aurora.regenstrief.org XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Wishes for XSL revisions , Joseph.Braun | Thread | RE: [xsl] Wishes for XSL revisions , Wendell Piez |
Re: Assignment no, dynamic scoping , Gunther Schadow | Date | RE: Assignment no, dynamic scoping , Oleg Tkachenko |
Month |