Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments - the chocolate hobnob challenge

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments - the chocolate hobnob challenge
From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 17:32:19 GMT

> What really worries me is that an extended period during which the spec
> privileges non-platform-portable extension functions over XSLT extension
> functions will do irreversible damage in terms of fragmenting the
> codebase and encouraging people to drop the idea of platform-independent
> portability as a realistic goal for XML technologies.

I'd very much like to see a mechism for defining functions in XSLT. Not
only to "save keystrokes" on the syntax of parameters to named templates
(although that in itself would be fairly good reason) but rather because
I can call functions inside deeply nested XPath expressions in ways that
are really difficult using named templates and variables. So it seems to
be extra functionality not just fewer keystrokes.

But I'm not sure how much adding that would remove the need for
external extension functions of the types currently used.
If you use an external function to use a regexp handler
or language aware date library, then you are unlikely to want to code
that functionality in XSLT eiher as a function or a named template. 

So I don't see that non xsl functions are "privileged". They are a
necessary evil.

I don't suppose I get the biscuit for this reply (Are you going to
provide a pint of Old Peculier to wash them down?)


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