Dimitre's implementation of higher-order functions has the advantage of
being done in pure XSLT, without requiring any extensions. I provided
saxon:function() primarily for XQuery, because (a) it's not possible to use
Dimitre's technique in XQuery as it lacks apply-templates, and (b) by
providing higher-order functions, many of the more advanced capabilities of
XSLT 2.0 such as for-each-group and analyze-string can be offered to XQuery
users with requiring custom syntax.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
I first heard about FXSL a fee weeks ago on XSL-List. I
seen there was a Saxon-specific implementation, that is now
removed from the release manager. Is this a choice?
I just see Saxon has native HOF. Is would be intresting
to have a Saxon-specific FXSL that uses these native HOF?
So the intresting pqrt of FXSL will not be qnymore to
provide HOF, but in the functions library it provides.
Does this make sense?
Regards,
--drkm
______________________________________________________________
_____________
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau
Yahoo! Messenger
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.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>
--~--
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--