RE: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request?)

Subject: RE: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request?)
From: "Chris Bayes" <chris@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 03:39:30 +0100
ERH,
Damn good idea. 
The changes for 1.1 and xslt that have come up since then will be way
overdue by the time schema support is shoehorned in. That there is not
even a murmur of a date fot v2 is a bit worying. We already have a
fallback mechanism so let's push it another level and have v2 (which
should really be 1.1+) and v3 (with schema).

That way we get all the pleasure and no pain.

Ciao Chris

XML/XSL Portal
http://www.bayes.co.uk/xml


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> Sent: 13 October 2001 18:10
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: xsl-editors@xxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and 
> idrefs - XSLT2 request?)
> 
> 
> At 4:12 PM +0100 10/10/01, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> 
> >So, the first question is whether XSLT 2.0 should mandate support of 
> >XML Schema within XSLT processors (i.e. you've got to be able to 
> >validate against XML Schema in order to be a conformant XSLT 2.0 
> >processor).
> 
> I propose something even more radical. Drop schemas 
> completely from XPath 2.0/XSLT 2.0. First do everything that 
> can be done without considering schemas; e.g. better 
> grouping, multiple document output, XHTML output method, text 
> inclusions, explicit matching of default namespaces, etc.  
> This could be implemented and finished much more quickly, and 
> would be useful in and of itself.
> 
> Then, and only then, begin work on XPath 3.0/XSLT 3.0 which 
> would consider only issues relevant to PSVI support. By this 
> time we might actually have some schema aware APIs to build 
> on top of. 
> 
> Furthermore this would also make XSLT 2.0 and 3.0 a lot 
> easier to teach and learn because it would be more obvious 
> what depended on what. You wouldn't, for example, have to 
> learn schemas in order to support multiple output documents. 
> -- 
> 
> +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
> | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | Writer/Programmer |
> +-----------------------+------------------------+------------
> -------+ 
> |          The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001)           |
> |              http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/              |
> |   http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/   |
> +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
> |  Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:  
> http://www.cafeaulait.org/      | 
> |  Read Cafe con Leche for 
> XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/     |
> +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> 
> 


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


Current Thread