Re: EXSLT 1.0 Proposed List

Thanks for your vote of confidence Simon!  It seems pretty obvious to me 
that if you, someone who hasn't always been a big advocate of XSLT in 
general, are taking the time to provide your comments and support of the 
EXSLT effort, its for good, well thought through reasons.

Thanks again! :D

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

>On Thu, 2006-02-16 at 20:38 +0000, Frans Englich wrote:
>  
>
>>Here's my advice: start extending your engines to support XSL-T 2.0. I
>>bet doing that is close to the labour required for duplicating the
>>XSL-T spec to an acceptable quality.
>>    
>>
>
>Except that some of us won't use those engines.  I'm still moderately
>irate that improvements (EXSLT math functions) I submitted for Saxon
>6.5.3 wound up only in the 7.x branch, despite the perfectly reasonable
>explanation Michael Kay gave me as to why that happened.
>
>As a user, I'd vastly vastly prefer a more complete set of EXSLT
>extensions to being told I really should use XSLT 2.0.  As someone who
>has implemented bits and pieces of EXSLT (admittedly years ago), I'd be
>much more likely to continue that than to contribute to an XSLT 2.0
>project.
>
>(I wasn't a huge fan of XSLT 1.0, but I do use it and even appreciate it
>today.  I don't see that ever happening for me with XSLT 2.0.)
>
>Accept the split.  M. David Peterson's earlier suggestion sounded to me
>like a sane way to make everyone happy.
>
>Simon St.Laurent
>http://simonstl.com/
>
>_______________________________________________
>exslt mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://www.exslt.org/list
>
>
>  
>