Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 4: normalize-mixed() From: "Graydon graydon@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 31 May 2020 18:53:24 -0000 |
On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 04:00:32AM -0000, Liam R. E. Quin liam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx scripsit: > > I realize that there's no reason not to write this as a user-defined > > function; it's how often I wind up wanting it that makes me think it > > might be something to consider as a language function. > > A widely shared xml-document funtion library might be better, do you > think? Depends. "Widely shared" seems to mean "shipped with the processor"; the EXPATH file utilities, for example, aren't practically distinct from "what you get with BaseX" or "what you get with Saxon". That's not how I think of a shared library; EXPATH seems more like a language extension. (a really USEFUL language extension!) I don't know of any actual shared libraries for XSLT; the package mechanism is new with XSLT 3 and not that widely used so far as I've seen. I wouldn't want to try to have an opinion on packaging for XSLT 4 because I've never used the existing package system. I'm pretty sure "widely shared function library" would require a lot more comfort with packages than currently exists. -- Graydon Saunders | graydonish@xxxxxxxxx ^fs oferiode, pisses swa mfg. -- Deor ("That passed, so may this.")
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT 4: normalize-mixed(), Liam R. E. Quin liam | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT 4: normalize-mixed(), Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Re: [xsl] Random number generator t, Michael Kay mike@xxx | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 4: normalize-mixed(), Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Month |