Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 17:56:56 -0700 |
> | and alternatively: > | > | -> if two conforming XSLT 1.1 processor implementations both > | have elected to implement the C++ language for extension > | functions, then developers can expect that ... > | Really, what can we expect in this case? > > At a minimum, they can expect exactly what they can > expect in XSLT 1.0, that is, nothing. > > Doing better than that, XSLT 1.1 provides an extensible > <xsl:script> mechanism for vendors to cooperate to agree > on a common C++ language binding, with a common QName > that describes the binding and which can be used in > the <xsl:script language="QName"> construct. XSLT 1.0 already provided this cafility: with extension functions and elements. If people need to band together to standardize exceptions, they can do so without xsl:script. I still haven't heard from you why this isn't so. > If the vendors do *not* want to cooperate to come up with > a C++ specific binding that they share, then they are > in the same situation as with XSLT 1.0. > > Net net, XSLT 1.1 neither promotes nor hinders this from happening, > but it provides a new mechanism to make it possible, should it > be the will of the web community. My point is that I see no technical advantages that XSLT 1.1 has added. Everything it provides for could be done at proper layers using XSLT 1.0. However, I do see 2 big non-technical disadvantages. 1. It encourages people to write non-interoperable stylesheets (by introducingxsl:script) 2. It gives a political boost to implementors of Java-based XSLT implementations (by writing language bindings into the language and allowing Java as a first-class extension language specification) What do the Java folks gain by making this clearly controversial addition? If they need a conveneient URI for their extension namespaces, I'm sure something can be easily worked out. -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Steve Muench | Thread | RE: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Steve Muench | Date | [xsl] [ANN] eXcelon Portal Server 3, Christopher Parkerso |
Month |