Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2001 12:58:23 GMT
> Im still -1 on script included within the stylesheet.

but it's there already (have a look over at 
people already have XSLT stylesheets full of msxml:script.
As a top level element not in the xsl namespace this can be ignored by
other processors (in which case the stylesheet won't work).
If instead it was a top level element in the XSl namespace that was
allowed to be ignored, I don't see how you would be worse off, and you
might be better off as the stylesheet might actually work in another

> I think the general point does. That a lot of what has been requested
> could be implemented by a higher degree of user skill/understanding?

That's always going to be true. But when designing a language^* if over
half the potential users can't do XXX without help, it is probably an
indication that there is a feature missing somewhere. You could do
everything with a finite alphabet a finite set of rules and an
infinitely long tape, but it can get tedious. Sometimes "convenience"
features makes all the difference. I think grouping is the prime example
here (even though it's not within scope for XSLT 1.1) It is clear that
most grouping problems can be solved in XSLT, and since SM's insight
into using keys for this, they can even be solved relatively efficiently
but it always just looks weird and arcane. Grouping primitves would make
all the difference, as would a node equality predicate so you could test
whether two nodes were equal (or one node was in a node set) without
resorting to generate-id() or count(.|$ns) = count($ns).


* I should stress that I'm _not_ involved in designing the language:-)

This message has been checked for all known viruses by Star Internet delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information visit

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread