Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments
From: Tobias Reif <tobiasreif@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 01:13:21 -0800 (PST)
--- Steve Muench <Steve.Muench@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Other than the few good points about making the spec
> clearer,
> the executive summary of the feedback seems to be
> "why are Java
> and ECMAScript special?"
> We encourage any additional feedback

IMHO, th best way to ensure
the further flourishing of XSLT as a professional and
rich Transformation-Language , and
the best possible portability of XSLTs
include all features neede for transformation of
XML-data (and don't leave all special needs or
advanced features to Java etC.)
specify no bindings or extension-mechanisms.
If XSLT will be good, neither bindings nor extensions
nor other languages are needed to transform XML.

It is true that most developers won't bother learning
any advanced XSLT-stuff when it is specified by the
spec as being valid to use their favourite
Programming-language with it.

I would like to be able to code all transformations of
XML with pure XSLT, to have portable


Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread