Subject: RE: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0 From: "Michael Kay" <mhk@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 16 May 2003 16:31:33 +0100 |
> > I've got some questions about element/instruction extensions in the > specification of XSLT 2.0. > The definition concerning the data mapping between XPath types and > java/ecmascript... types, described in the version 1.1 has > disappeared. The decision to abandon the attempt to define language bindings for extension functions was made a long time ago, and documented in the XSLT 2.0 requirements. There were a number of reasons for the decision. The fact that the XSLT 1.1 draft supported Java and ECMAScript, and no other languages, was very sensitive politically, both with vendors and with users. If you look in the archives of this list you will find the evidence of the user side of this, though it was probably the vendor side that influenced the working group to make the decision. Another factor was that it was becoming clear that XSLT 2.0 would have a much richer type system, and that bindings between Java types and XML Schema types were not a local matter for the XSL WG to define on its own. The decision at the time was that standardized language bindings, e.g. for Java, would be useful, but they should not be done within W3C and should not be part of the XSLT specification. Eventually I hope that they might become part of JAXP. Michael Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0, Frédéric Laurent | Thread | Re: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0, Frédéric Laurent |
Re: [xsl] XSLT In the Build Process, Mike Haarman | Date | Re: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0, Frédéric Laurent |
Month |