David,
Thanks again. I didn't really like the fact that the MSXML script
extension was a vendor-specific work-around thus could be dropped at any
time, and now that the xsl:script element has been dropped from the spec
its even worse. My package is being converted completely to Java so
adding saxon7.jar to the classpath is not a big deal.
My main concern with XSLT 2.0 is how well it can be maintained by
someone else on the project team. With XSLT 1.0 we could just get the
newcomers to buy Mr. Kay's book. The HTML documentation that comes with
Saxon is a good reference but is not a tutorial. This is an argument
for using JavaScript - its easier to understand and modify for a VB
programmer than XSL.
Barry
M. David Peterson wrote:
Hi Barry,
Thanks for the clarification. Your problem is pretty straight forward and
in fact can be done fairly easily in XSLT 1.0. But you are correct in your
assumption that 2.0 would be a much more complete and straight forward
solution. If for no other reason (and there are plenty) the regex
implementation in 2.0 gives you the much needed ability to do complex string
matching that, while possible in 1.0, is more complex to implement than is
worth the effort.
...
<M:D/>