In the case of Saxon, it was needed by an XQuery user, and availability in
XSLT was just a spin-off. It's not possible to use the FXSL approach in
XQuery because it relies on xsl:apply-templates. In fact, this kind of
capability is needed much more in XQuery because even without FXSL, there
are many things you can do with xsl:apply-templates to handle dynamic
content that have no simple solution in XQuery.
Reading between the lines it sounds like XQuery really is dumbed-down XSLT.
Anyway, as an insider, Mike, are you able to say just why higher-order
functions
were left out of XSLT/XPath 2.0?
What the heck is wrong with the W3C given that so many academics got
together back in 1998 thereabouts to create Haskell in order to unify
functional programming and, just when the W3C had the chance, with a
clean slate, they chose to ignore functional programming re their
transform languages altogether.
Any element of function programming in XSLT (as exposed by FXSL) is
more due to DSSSL than the W3C. Funny. if I recall correctly,
James Clark of DSSSL (read Scheme, read FP) fame was the editor
of XSLT 1.0 so why didn't FP make it into XSLT from birth?
Cheers
Justin Johansson
Mad XSLT-er from Downunder (or should that be at large or in-the-large?)
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--