Subject: Re: [xsl] Are there things missing in XSLT which force people to use, say, Java to process XML? From: Stefan Krause <stf@xxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 12:18:25 +0100 |
Hello, the absence of some basic I/O functionality forces me to use extension functions, java, or ant. Consider the creating of an EPUB from a DocBook source: - XSL transformation of the source XML - copying images from source to the destination folder - zip the destination folder You can't do that with pure XSLT. It would be very handy to have some really basic commands to avoid switching to other languages, like - prompt (raised by Gerrit) - copy/move/delete/rename/create files and folders - zip/unzip - checking file properties (exists, date of create/last change, size) I know that there are good reasons, why these functions are not part of XSLT. On the other hand, these lack of functionality is a massive handicap within a lot of common tasks. With regard to the small/large project discussion: especially small projects (one time stylesheets, one purpose scripts) would benefit from this functionality because of the lesser costs for developing and deploying. Stefan Am 29.10.2010 um 14:28 schrieb Costello, Roger L.: > Hi Folks, > > Many developers use Java to process XML documents. > > Why? > > Are there things missing in XSLT which force them to use Java? What things? > > > /Roger
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Are there things missing , Xmlizer | Thread | Re: [xsl] Are there things missing , Michael Müller-Hille |
Re: [xsl] RE: Are there things miss, Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] RE: Are there things miss, Wolfgang Laun |
Month |