Daniel,
Never mind. You answered the question I didn't state very well. I've brought
up the too tight coupling between XPath2 and XSD, and while I understand
that there are a lot of PSVI people that want to have that tight coupling,
when you don't want it (which I suspect will be most of the time) it ends up
adding a lot of complexity with little return. Oh well.
-- Kurt
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel Veillard" <daniel(_at_)veillard(_dot_)com>
To: <xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: [xsl] is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation)
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 01:39:07PM -0800, Kurt Cagle wrote:
Daniel,
If you didn't include explicit type conversions (which are a pain to
deal
with anyway -- I spend entirely too much time with Saxon 7.3 debugging
type
conversion code in XSLT2) do you think you could create something that
is
functionally compliant? I was rather hoping to see a version of libxslt
for
XSLT2/XPath2 soon.
I'm not sure I fully understand your question.
The problem is that starting an implementation of a spec knowing you
don't have the tools to implement 100% of it is like jumping from a cliff
not knowing the depth of the water below :-\
Honnestly don't hold your breath for XSLT2/XPath2 support in
libxslt/libxml2
this sounds a large effort also with big prerequisites.
Daniel
--
Daniel Veillard | Red Hat Network https://rhn.redhat.com/
veillard(_at_)redhat(_dot_)com | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit
http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list