Re: Status

Frans Englich <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.xslt.extensions
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Wednesday 01 February 2006 23:35, John L. Clark wrote:
> In order to take stock of where this project lies and perhaps infuse it
> with some new energy, I started an ad-hoc status document[0] that
> catalogs some of the outstanding issues that I believe ought to be
> addressed by the community in some form.
>
> I think that we should spawn new threads on this list for any of the
> individual topics raised in the article.  The article currently only
> covers substantive issues, but I plan to extend it to procedural issues
> in the near future.

<quote>
I know that several people have also expressed interest in a 
method="exsl:xhtml".
</quote>

XSL-T 2.0 has this..?

<quote>
baseURI and documentURI (January, 2002) 
These are extremely obvious (at least to me), and I'd like to get them in.

EXSLT URI [Encoding] function proposals (August, 2003)
</quote>

As mentioned in the article as well, XPath 2.0 provides this?

Wouldn't it be a great idea to not duplicate what XSL-T 2.0 already provides? 
The XPath/XSL-T/XQuery specs are well written, strongly specified, and backed 
up by a good test suite. I see several reasons: 1) Spend energy on stuff not 
already done; 2) it's difficult and labour intensive to achieve a result of 
the same quality the XSL/XQuery WGs did; and 3) don't fragment the market and 
don't compete with XSL-T 2.0, that makes everyone happier.

I see the purpose of EXSL-T as to improve interoperability. Instead of that 
implementors implement their own similar but slightly different extensions, 
it's done in a standardized way. I think that thinking would be enhanced by 
filling the holes XSL-T 2.0 has, instead of adding a similar but slightly 
different layer.

Personally, what I would like to see is strong specification of what the 
extensions does, and a test suite. The XSL-T 2.0 WG is working on a test 
suite, and perhaps that format can be re-used for specifying a future EXSL-T 
test suite. On the other hand, perhaps I've gotten brain damaged by reading 
F&O and the others..


Cheers,

		Frans
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.