Subject: Re: [xsl] Saxon for C/PHP/Python/etc From: Steve Ball <Steve.Ball@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 11:06:18 +1000 |
Hi All, A few years ago (2009 or 2010 from memory) I asked a similar question on the libxml2/libxslt mailing list: who would be interested in upgrading libxml2/libxslt to XPath2/XSLT2[*]? The resounding answer is that everyone wants it but none is willing to devote time/effort to making it happen; in particular Daniel Veillard. As a result I started a closed-source development myself. However, this project requires significant engineering resources and the project has stalled for the last 2 years (while I concentrate on paying work). NB. this was in the days before KickStarter. Perhaps a KickerStarter-type campaign would gather enough resources to restart this work? Cheers, Steve Ball * XPath is implemented in libxml2, so in order to fully implement XPath2 & XSLT2 development must be done on both libxml2 and libxslt. PS. a C implementation of XPath2/XSLT2 does not necessarily have to rely on libxml2/libxslt but it is a good starting place. On 27/09/2013, at 11:07 PM, Tony Graham <tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, September 27, 2013 11:57 am, Adam Retter wrote: >> After hearing Tony Graham's lightening talk at the XML Summer School I > > Thank you for the timely reminder. Slides, all five minutes' worth, now > at http://www.mentea.net/resources/after-libxslt.pdf (and linked to from > http://inasmuch.as/2013/09/27/is-there-life-after-libxslt-1/ and > http://www.mentea.net/resources.html). > > Lauren Wood and Matt Biddulph helped start this cycle of the permathread > because they're interested in a libXSLT-replacement for Ruby in > particular. > > ... >> On 27 September 2013 11:50, Dr O'Neil Delpratt <oneil@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Dear XSLT community, >>> >>> I have recently been looking at the possbilities of making XSLT 2.0/3.0 >>> processor available to the C/C++ world. >>> At present there seems to be a real shortage or a lack of support for >>> anything greater than XSLT 1.0 (i.e libxslt, Xalan, etc). >>> >>> The benefits are clearly to be seen: having a fullfledged XSLT 2.0 in C >>> would be great for the PHP/Python/Ruby/... communities, who currently >>> rely >>> on libxslt. > > The other side of it, IMO, is that the processor needs to read and write > libXML2-compatible trees so all the code that (for anything more than > file-file transformation) currently produces the inputs and consumes the > output from libXSLT (or from a language binding to libXSLT) can 'just > work' until such time as code can be rewritten to use any superior > 'native' interface of the processor. > > Regards, > > > Tony Graham tgraham@xxxxxxxxxx > Consultant http://www.mentea.net > Mentea 13 Kelly's Bay Beach, Skerries, Co. Dublin, Ireland > -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- > XML, XSL-FO and XSLT consulting, training and programming > Chair, Print and Page Layout Community Group @ W3C
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] FO profiling, Tony Graham | Thread | Re: [xsl] Saxon for C/PHP/Python/et, Adam Retter |
Re: [xsl] Any students looking for , Michael Kay | Date | Re: [xsl] Saxon for C/PHP/Python/et, Steve Ball |
Month |