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: "M. David Peterson" <m.david.x2x2x@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2005 17:32:48 -0700
> (There might be others I'm just
not thinking of right now.)

In fact one of the primary reasons Microsoft has held back from
providing direct support for the XSLT 2.0 spec is based on the last
second 'split' of the 1.0 spec into the XSL (FO) and XSLT
specifications causing an incompatible processor to be propogated and
a support nightmare to be invoked.  I would tend to think that the W3C
has made the necessary changes to ensure that this kind of thing
doesn't take place again but I would also consider the fact that, as
Mr. Harold recognizes, last second changes happen often enough that
the possibility must be considered when making any long term plans for
a technology.

With that said, it seems the latest release of the XPath 2.0, XSLT
2.0, and XQuery drafts have gone a long way into fixing a lot of the
areas that may have been considered questionable or potential problem
areas but caution still must be employed none-the-less.

Best regards,


On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 14:03:25 -0500, Elliotte Harold
<elharo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 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!


:: M. David Peterson ::
XML & XML Transformations, C#, .NET, and Functional Languages Specialist

Current Thread