On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:19:23PM +0000, David Carlisle wrote:
The dependancy on W3C XML Schemas makes it very very unlikely for me.
You don't want to implement it, and I don't particularly want to use it
(for the same reasons). It's a shame as it would have been nice to have
standard multiple output, the demise of result-tree fragments and regexp
support. (in fact just those three and nothing else would have been
worth specifying an xslt2 for, XSLT2 (and especially Xpath2) is mainly
just depressing reading after those much anticipated highlights.
heh, don't get depressed !
First until XSLT-2.0 is complete one should not "discard" it, maybe
providing more feedback is needed. In the meantime EXSLT is one way to
label those "common" extensions. I understand that Michael want to focuse
on XSLT-2 development. Maybe someone can simply write the patch needed
to get Saxon to implement exslt:document, based on the existing Saxon
extension (which I implemented too) this should not be too hard. Having
EXSLT widely deployed will give the XSL group the time to finish XSLT-2
and XPath-2.
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