True enough Demitre, but as you are already using vendor:node-set you
may as well
use exsl's max() and min() functions...
First a small correction: for XSLT 1.0 the latest FXSL version 1.2 uses
ext:node-set(), where the prefix "ext" is associated with
Sure, so you could easily use http://exslt.org/math and then exsl:min() and
FXSL for XSLT 2.0 does not use any extension functions and does not need
separate implementation for a particular XSLT 2.0 processor like EXSLT
Afaik, the two biggies (Saxon and Xalan) that support xslt 2.0 already support
How big is the portability issue anyway? At the end of the day, when
converting stylesheets from one processor to another, it just means changing
the namespace. Of course it's essential for client side apps, but as most
processing is controlled serverside or in standalone apps, developers have
control of their environments and know exactly which processor they want to
use. Should one processor start out performing another, at worst a namespace
change is required.
The question should be more properly formulated like this: why one would
use FXSL's minimum() and maximum() over EXSLT's min() and max() and vice
more generally why and in what cases one would choose the FXSL's functions
EXSLT's functions and vice versa.
Yes, that is a better way of formulating the question. I think your English is
probably better than mine, I'm from Cornwall :)
The answer is that this depends on the needs of the user.
That’s exactly it. The rest of your answer re-iterates the power of HOF's and
the other many pro's of using FXSL, but I think sometimes you miss the point of
using exslt - its easy!
I just think when a new user ask's for min() and max() functions, it's best to
let them discover exslt before incurring the extra learning curve of fxsl.
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.495 / Virus Database: 294 - Release Date: 30/06/2003
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list