Re: [xsl] Are there any free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processors?

Subject: Re: [xsl] Are there any free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processors?
From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 09:06:33 +0100
Having been on both sides of similar activities in the past, I agree
with much of what both Adam and Florent said.

For CXAN to flourish it needs high quality packages and integrations
into the main platforms.

For people to easily submit to CXAN it must be done in a democratic open way.

I will repeat Florent's suggestion lets try to use XML Prague as a
springboard to get as many packages into CXAN as possible.

Lets see how many packages we can get submitted to CXAN, across XSLT,
XQuery, and XProc over the XML Prague 2013 period.

game on ....


On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 2:11 AM, Florent Georges <darkman_spam@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Adam Retter wrote:
>   Hi,
>> 1) You have to extend pkg spec as its not yet complete or mature
>> enough.  We have our own bits built-on-top, should be made common.
>   To be fair, eXist is able to build on top of it because it has been
> designed as such.  Its goal was to be a simple, low-level piece of the
> architecture, extensible for more dedicated work.  The goal was not to
> be a web app format for instance, but one could (and some have) build
> such a format based on the core packaging system.
>> 2) CXAN is a single server and there is no process for uploading
>> remotely.  You have to ask and make arrangements to get stuff put on
>> there.
>   There is a web form to upload packages on the website.  There is
> also a test server at with public credentials.
> The main website has no public credentials; I am happy to give access
> to anyone uploading libraries, but using the test server is a first
> step, yes.
>   Of course the website and the feature set can be improved, and I am
> happy to receive code contributions.  Maybe Github would be easier for
> others to contribute, true, but SVN on Google Code is not a blocker
> issue, is it?
>   I understand it can be frustrating not to have the system behaving
> and offering exactly all you want, but that is how it works, by using
> it and contributing, you improve it push it in the direction you
> chose.
>> 3) Governance, EXPath project still seems to be one man in control
>> of the resources.
>   Trust me, that man does not want that :-)  That's also why EXPath is
> a W3C group now, with two chairs.  But we're talking about something
> different then.  EXPath is about writing specs for extensions.
> Everyone's welcome, but this is a different business than writing and
> gathering libraries.
>   But I heard that argument quite often, and I think it is more or
> less founded.  But honestly I am not sure how we can improve this.  If
> you have any precise ideas, I'm more than interested.
>   By the way, I'll be happy to show anyone how to upload libraries on
> CXAN at XML Prague, for those who are coming.  Or even to show how to
> adapt their labraries to the EXPath packaging (which really, is now
> quite easy with XProject <>,
> either from the command line or from oXygen).
>   Wrt CXAN, maybe a step-by-step guide could help?  Or maybe a series
> of screencasts could be interesting to explain how to package properly
> a library, how to upload it, how to use CXAN from a user point of
> view, etc.  Unfortunately I am not very good at screencasts, so any
> help welcome :-)
>   But the real important point for CXAN to be sucessful (and any
> useful, as a matter of fact), is to have libraries to offer.  And to
> come back to the very initial subject, I expect XQuery/XSLT 3.0 to
> boost library offer, by having more facilities for library authors.
>   So if you (yes, y'all) have interesting pieces of code, could be
> XSLT, XQuery, XProc, but also standard schemas or other XML
> technologies, package them up and upload them to CXAN!  And if you
> don't know exactly how to proceed, don't be afraid and ask :-)
>   Regards,
> --
> Florent Georges

Current Thread