Subject: Re: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request?) From: Francis Norton <francis@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:09:42 +0100 |
Could I include Regular Expressions and Extension Functions in XSLT as part of the new v.2 wish list? Providing those two would really open for XSLT's organic expansion. Francis. Chris Bayes wrote: > > 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 XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [, Chris Bayes | Thread | RE: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] selecting nodes - syntax?, Oleg Tkachenko | Date | [xsl] Xalan extension library probl, Ofer Kalisky |
Month |