Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments
From: Alexey Gokhberg <alexei@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 15:55:40 +0100

Alexey Gokhberg wrote:
> >
> > This means that my original statement IS TRUE. Java implementors will
> > enjoy benefits from XSLT 1.1 standartization, while Python and C
> > developers will have to "get together to come up with standard binding
> > for ... extension functions ..."
> >

Michael Kay wrote:
> Speaking personally, I can't see any reason why the XSL WG would object to
> including a standard language binding for any language if there is
> sufficient interest and consensus among users and implementors to create a
> specification. Unless of course politics gets in the way, but I find it hard
> to imagine that this would happen with Python or C.

As the matter of fact, W3C is a private organization, which serves
interests of its members. It is, by design, not a standard body. The
fact that W3C acts as a standard body, having an enormous influence,
does not change anything.

Apparently, W3C members are interested in providing the first-class
treatment for Java-based XSLT implementations only, and have no interest
in supporting any other language platforms.

On the other hand, W3C has absolutely no obligations to the non-member

In particular, non-member XSLT vendors have absolutely no reasons to
request and expect any services from W3C. They must find another way to
solve their private problems.

Considering these facts, I have to agree with you.

When the non-member asks W3C: "Why don't you treat Python, C++, etc.
platforms equally to Java?", the correct answer is: "Because we have no
interest. Because it is not our duty. Because it is your problem".


Alexey Gokhberg

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread