xsl-list
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: is XSLT 2.0 implementable? (was: N : M transformation)

2003-02-03 15:12:06
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 10:48:52PM +0100, Tobias Reif wrote:
Daniel Veillard wrote:


I agree that dependency on WXS is a bad aspect, but I think it won't be 
required for all implementations.

  First news to me, how can you back-up that statement ?


http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#import-schema
"
Issue 125 (schema-conformance):
We need to describe a conformance level that does not require schema 
support.
"

http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/#issue-schema-conformance
"
Issue 125: schema-conformance

Description: We need to describe a conformance level that does not 
require schema support.

Resolution: We decided that we should define a conformance level in 
which schema processing was not required. The details, however, have not 
been worked out.
"

  Okay, interesting. I assume this will affect XPath2 (though XPath 1
had no conformance clause since it was targetted by embedding in other
specs)...

  Well that would probably lead to a complete revamp of
of the structure part.


If that's what it takes to make the spec implementable (for you and 
probably others), then this should be evaluated by the WG IMHO.

  The problem is that making "editorial" changes to a given revision
of a spec and keeping the rev level is find, but if it's a rewrite
it's also very dangerous, if both specs ends up diverging.

  I think Michael and Henry know me well enough, and that I propagated
that back to them. It's also clear that I tried an implementation within
libxml2 but it became quickly too painful that I focused on other targets.


My personal POV is:
I like XSLT, and I see room for improvement in XSLT 1.0 (regexen, 
multiple output files, etc).
So I'd be very happy to see XSLT evolve in a direction which addresses 
some of these areas (as the current draft of 2.0 does in some of the 
perhaps less controversial parts).
But all that has no value if it won't be widely implemented, which can 
only happen if (at leat some of the) implementers (of the currently 
popular processors) can implement it, and see value in doing so.

  there is also little values in specs that are not fully implemented
if each tool/vendor has it's own supported subset you end up with 
something terrible for the users.

[...]
   "I can't implement a specification I don't understand."

then that means that other implementers probably have rightful concerns 
about the current draft as well.

  Hum, there might have been a misunderstanding, I didn't said that
for XPath2/XSLT2 but for XML Schemas Structure. And it's not a draft
it's a REC, i.e. cast in stone.

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