Subject: Re: [xsl] N : M transformation From: Daniel Veillard <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 19:38:04 +0100 |
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 05:47:29PM +0000, David Carlisle wrote: > In general I'd agree although in the case of xslt I'm not sure how many > of the current implementors are planning to do an XSLT2. Most have been > quite quiet on the subject. The dependancy on W3C XML Schemas makes it very very unlikely for me. I can't implement a specification I don't understand. As as side effect I can't implement specifications depending on it too. Life is short ... I don't want to bury month and months of mine into trying to implement (and support !) a spec which is just too unclear to be understood reliably. At least that's my perception so far. Daniel -- Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/ veillard@xxxxxxxxxx | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit http://xmlsoft.org/ http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, David Carlisle | Thread | [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (w, Tobias Reif |
Re: [xsl] N : M transformation, Daniel Veillard | Date | [xsl] replace value using two xml, miguel aviles |
Month |