Subject: [xsl] Poluting XSLT??? (Was Re: Designs for XSLT functions ) From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2001 21:42:46 -0800 (PST) |
> Because that creates a new node set stuffed full of *copies* of the > nodes, not the original nodes. You could do: > > <exsl:function> > <xsl:param name="nodes" /> > <xsl:variable name="foo"> > <xsl:for-each select="$nodes"> > <xsl:sort /> > <xsl:if test="5 <= position()"> > <node id="{generate-id()}" /> > </xsl:if> > </xsl:for-each> > </xsl:variable> > <exsl:return select="$nodes[generate-id() = $foo/node/@id]" /> > </exsl:function> > > as a non-recursive and fairly hacky solution. I'd rather see more professional discussion on the ways to extend XSLT with new and necessary functionality. I have the feeling that the real implementors are watching with amusement (if not bored already) this and other threads and just throwing in a few words from time to time. While discussions like this can be useful it is just a first initial stage of a process in which the developers must step in later. If left to people with little experience as XSLT implementors, we'll have pretty soon a variety of new xsl elements that are redundant and a language -- far from elegant. In this particular case: 1. Sometimes ago I proposed a "xsl:reference-of" element 2. Other people think now of "xsl:append" These two new elements will behave essetially as "xsl:copy-of", but with a small variation -- will output the same node -- not its copy. Isn't it best to say that we only need the same "xsl:copy-of" element with a slightly changed syntax and behaviour? Like: <xsl:copy-of select="expression" create-reference="yes|no"> This is just an example, which shows that in many cases it could be possible not to add new elements to XSLT. Maybe we need a separate mailing list, dedicated to XSLT language evolution and development, where implementors will be the driving force and perform more analytical work than sociological surveys. I hate politics, especially when there's an attempt to mix it with technology. Any attempt to extend a language by voting reminds me of "popular movements", "party meetings" and the well-known results of these in history. Just as a summary -- it is not yet the time to propose decisions -- especially if the key players have not actively stepped in. Think before you act... Dimitre Novatchev. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices! http://auctions.yahoo.com/ XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Vendor-specific data-type, Andrew Kimball | Thread | Re: [xsl] Poluting XSLT??? (Was Re:, Jeni Tennison |
RE: [xsl] Vendor-specific data-type, Andrew Kimball | Date | Re: Designs for XSLT functions (Was, Clark C. Evans |
Month |