If yes, are there enough known deficiencies in the 2.0 spec to justify
starting a new EXSLT 2.0-like project or is too early at this point to
tell? I'm not suggesting I know that answer and you most certainly
would have a much better feel for this than me. Just curious as to
what exactly the focus would be. Higher-order functions I'm assuming
would be one area of focus?
HOF support is already implemented with FXSL for XSLT 2.0. All F & O
functions, operators and constructors (with very few exceptions) and
even some XSLT features have their FXSL identically named HO
functions.
In my experience there are only two major features lacking in XSLT 2.0
/ XPath 2.0:
- nested sequences (this is entirely XPath 2.0 DM problem)
- no easy and convenient way to serialize xsl:variables
(especially ones containing
sequences) in XML. There is no standard function that returns
the type of the value
contained in an xsl:variable -- this type must be stored as part
of the serialization
process, otherwise the value of the xsl:variable will not be
properly de-serialised (the
type will be lost).
I don't think an EXSLT-like activity can solve the first problem
above. The second can be solved with a little effort in pure XSLT 2.0
(I have implemented a type-of() function but have to extend it to work
with list-types)
EXSLT can definitely contribute to the standardisation of such
features as function memoisation and accessing environments. However,
its long inactivity has prompted some people to ask if EXSLT is dead.
Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.
Of course theres still the issue of dynamic XPath evaluation unless I
have missed something and it has recently been added? (wishful
thinking :)
Anything else?
On 12 May 2005 12:03:49 +0100, Colin Paul Adams
<colin(_at_)colina(_dot_)demon(_dot_)co(_dot_)uk> wrote:
EXSLT seems to be dead. Both Dimitre and I have fairly recently
submitted proposals for new features (memo-functions, and environment
variables for system-property() (as suggested by Michael Kay)
respectively.
Both were agreed, yet nothing has appeared on the web site (despite
Dmitre chasing up on his proposal).
Maybe it's time for an equivalent for XSLT 2.0?
--
Colin Adams
Preston Lancashire
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--
--
<M:D/>
:: M. David Peterson ::
XML & XML Transformations, C#, .NET, and Functional Languages Specialist
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--