2010/1/19 Justin Johansson <procode(_at_)adam(_dot_)com(_dot_)au>
Andrew Welch wrote:
2010/1/18 Justin Johansson <procode(_at_)adam(_dot_)com(_dot_)au>:
Hi Andrew,
Yes, well, my response to Vyacheslav was a tad rhetorical.
So let's rephrase my original quandary yet again.
"Given the neglect (i.e. XSLT for anything else other than Saxon/Java
(notwithstanding .Net autoport)),
does *any other* community really want one?"
As was mentioned earlier in the thread, Intel and IBM both have their
own commercial xslt 2.0 processors, and MarkLogic is adding xslt 2.0
support in version 5... (because of popular demand)
Everyone wants XSLT 2.0, it's the best!
First, thanks to all for replies to my inquiry on this thread and also many
thanks to Abel Braaksma for seeding this discussion.
Yay, Andrew, I don't need any convincing of, as you say, "XSLT 2.0, it's the
best" :-)
What I was hoping for was more convincing that there are real gaps in the
"market" for XSLT 2.0 engines and particularly in the C/C++ implementation
space.
Porting Saxon from Java to C++ would be a good move !
Aaron
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail: <mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--~--