Thanks for your comments Abel.
At 08:53 AM 18/07/2007 +0200, you wrote:
Justin Johansson wrote:
Do people have any feedback on whether, in their XSLT workplace, they are
using XSLT 1.0 or XSLT 2.0 and/or if they have any idea on what the market
share of these W3C recommendations currently is and where, in the scheme of
things, XSLT 2.0 will go?
XSLT 2.0 is huge leap forward from XSLT 1.0 (changes are regexes, plain
In my own experience, I find XSLT 2.0 very rewarding to work with,
I could not agree with you more, the gap between the two being similar to
that between BASIC 1.0 and VB.Net.
But you do not need Microsoft to enable XSLT 2.0 in your applications,
of course. Any application nowadays is made up of a bunch of libraries,
and it will be easy to add Saxon.NET to your application, which supports
XSLT 2.0 fully and completely. Same about Gestalt XSLT, which is built
in Eiffel and Eiffel.NET can compile it to a .NET library (didn't test
that myself though). Gestalt supports XSLT 2.0, but is not (yet) fully
compliant.
Yes that is true and if I were to be mandating the design in an XSLT
project then XSLT 2.0 would be it. Period.
However, as unfortunate as it is, it is true that in many organizations,
particularly government and large corporations, the rather myopic attitude
that
"If is not Microsoft we cannot, and will not, put it in our SOE" persists.
It's really crazy but that's how its been with more than one gov.
department and company in my experience.
So as long as these attitudes continue, managers will still look to see if
Microsoft is doing it before making a commitment to use technology X.
Justin Johansson
Freelance XML / XSLT / XQuery Developer
Australia
procode(at)tpg(dot)com(dot)au
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--