Re: [xsl] Is there a reason for not using XSLT 2.0 as a default

Subject: Re: [xsl] Is there a reason for not using XSLT 2.0 as a default
From: Elliotte Harold <elharo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:03:25 -0500
JBryant@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

I can see two issues. First, you'll tie yourself to a single vendor. That's not much of an issue, since you would probably pick a single vendor anyway and since Saxonica is a fine vendor. Second, the 2.0 specification may change before it is finalized. However, that risk seems to be low, as the working group is winding down (so I gather anyway).

I certainly wouldn't count on that. It is far from unheard of for a working group to think it's winding down when someone comes out of left field and identifies an unrecognized problem that causes a major rethink and redesign. It doesn't happen to every or even most specs, but it does happen often enough to be a problem. So far I've seen this happen to XPointer, XInclude, SOAP, and xml:id. (There might be others I'm just not thinking of right now.)

There are numerous other specs where this should have happened but nobody noticed the problems until after final publication. XSLT 2 isn't done until the final spec is released, and maybe not then.

Elliotte Rusty Harold  elharo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
XML in a Nutshell 3rd Edition Just Published!

Current Thread