Re: [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation)

Subject: Re: [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation)
From: Daniel Veillard <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2003 23:04:01 +0100
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 01:39:07PM -0800, Kurt Cagle wrote:
> Daniel,
> If you didn't include explicit type conversions (which are a pain to deal
> with anyway -- I spend entirely too much time with Saxon 7.3 debugging type
> conversion code in XSLT2) do you think you could create something that is
> functionally compliant? I was rather hoping to see a version of libxslt for
> XSLT2/XPath2 soon.

   I'm not sure I fully understand your question.
The problem is that starting an implementation of a spec knowing you
don't have the tools to implement 100% of it is like jumping from a cliff
not knowing the depth of the water below :-\
Honnestly don't hold your breath for XSLT2/XPath2 support in libxslt/libxml2
this sounds a large effort also with big prerequisites.


Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network
veillard@xxxxxxxxxx  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit | Rpmfind RPM search engine

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread