Subject: Re: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicle for XSLT extensions? (fwd) From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2001 02:10:27 -0500 (EST) |
Steve, you failed to address any of the points I made below. a) The functionality is the primary object, and it identified by an opaque, language independent URI that is unique in the current context. b) That the implementations and/or instructions for binding to an implementation need not be in the stylesheet itself, perferably it is a seperate xml structure independent of XSLT and re-useable by other specifications. c) The the method for obtaining an implementation of this functionality not be singluar, that is, only provided via xsl:script. Perhaps even allowing for functions to be used with only a namespace binding; assuming that an implementation is either built-in, in a local catalogue, or perhaps downloadable via RDDL. d) That the identifying URI also be coupled with a IDL like description of the module. e) Perhaps even the identifying URI is required to be a a globally unique URL that can be used to fetch via RDDL a catalogue of implementations, etc. But this may be too restrictive. Thanks! Clark XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] xbind:module == xsl:scrip, Clark C. Evans | Thread | [xsl] Working with QNames in values, Simon Fell |
Re: [xsl] xbind:module == xsl:scrip, Clark C. Evans | Date | Re: [xsl] RDDL as a delivery vehicl, Clark C. Evans |
Month |