Subject: RE: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0 From: "Michael Kay" <mhk@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 17:52:52 +0100 |
> Thanks for your response, this is the confirmation of my > reading of the archives of the list and other articles. > > Then I've got 1 concrete question (more in fact, but let's > start with it) : > > I write an extension element in java with the saxon processor > by implementing the > net.sf.saxon.style.ExtensionElementFactory. It works, and I'm > very happy. But then, I have to change the implementation of > xslt, and move to xalan (or any other java processor). > I've got a problem, haven't I ? > Saxon uses its own interface, and xalan too... So I've got to > rewrite my extension according to the xalan interface. > > I thought that XSLT 1.1 would provide independant interfaces > (in the same way that DOM does with the org.w3c.dom.* > package) in order to write portable code. Wouldn't it be more > simple and safe for user to have such a definition ? Yes, it would be nice if there was a standard interface for doing this. But the XSL WG decided that it was not their job, and no-one else has volunteered. Michael Kay XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0, Frédéric Laurent | Thread | Re: [xsl] extensions and XSLT 2.0, Frédéric Laurent |
[xsl] Re: Re: Re: Using XSL for a ", Dimitre Novatchev | Date | RE: [xsl] Xpath and for-each loopin, Michael Kay |
Month |