Future XSLT expansion. ( Re: Microsoft XSL and Conformance )

[Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx>]

Hi Didier,
 
> Jonathan Borden said:
> Again, the most important feature for me, not yet implemented is document()
> support. Hint Hint...
> 
> Didier replies:
> I cannot agree more on that. the Document() function is the angular stone of
> web services usage based on URL request. Just imagine having the possibility
> to make a SQL call with a URL and get back an XML document fragment.
> Furthermore, to be able to get within that fragment the exact
> element/elements through Xpath. As a concrete example:
> 
> document('http://www.mysqlserver.com/sql=select * from mytable')/row/name

Just in case - why not  

document('http://www.mysqlserver.com/sql=select name from mytable')

> Yes indeed, the document function is where the magic potion is hidden

I don't think it is a good idea to turn XSLT into yet another monster 
with things like that.

I think XSLT's extension elements could ( should ) do things like that. 

( I actualy think that it could be better to remove some stuff from XSLT to 
achive better balancing between core XSLT and extensions, but that's another 
story.).

Isn't it  strange that fundamental node:set 'typecast'  is not in a core, 
but some other things are in there ? 

Rgds.Paul.



 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list