RE: EXSLT 1.0 Proposed List

    > What motivation can there be to implement something as a 
    1.0 extension 
    > when it is available as 2.0 base functionality?
    >   
    
    As you can see in the legend, there is a lot in EXSLT *now* 
    that is also available in XSLT 2.0.  Why did people 
    implement those extensions?

Because of the timing Uche? 
XSLT 2.0 is nearing rec status.

    
    Of course the answer is that implementing a handful of 
    useful functions/elements that happen to be similar to ones 
    available in XSLT 2.0 is *much* simpler than implementing 
    XPath 2.0 and XSLT 2.0 itself. 
Agreed. 
    A hell of a lot easier.  Several implementors, including 
    me, have expressed the preference to move the most useful 
    and sensible extensions into EXSLT so that people don't 
    have to deal with the XPath/XSLT 2.0 mess if they don't want to.


*slowly* I'm becoming a convert to 2.0. Yes, there is a mess in there,
but at the same time there are some very useful bits too.

Useful and sensible as the criteria? I guess that makes sense,
even if its 4suite on the route to an XSLT 2.0 implementation
it will allow for a cleaner migration?

Do you think other implementations would show similar levels of interest?
Daniel, Apache, Oleg?

Spec'd without implementations could appear silly.

regards DaveP

** snip here **


-- 
DISCLAIMER:

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be privileged.  If you are not the intended 
recipient you should not use, disclose, distribute or copy any of the 
content of it or of any attachment; you are requested to notify the 
sender immediately of your receipt of the email and then to delete it 
and any attachments from your system.

RNIB endeavours to ensure that emails and any attachments generated by
its staff are free from viruses or other contaminants.  However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any  such which are transmitted.
We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email and 
any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk