IMO, it doesn't (quite) matter if the current discussion
doesn't lead to running software, much as I would prefer it
if it did. The question of whether there would be a libxslt
for XSLT 2.0 has been asked several times over recent years,
and each time it comes closer to being answered with "yes".
To take the discussion in a slightly different direction, there's absolutely
no doubt that there is a demand for XSLT 2.0 especially if it's free. What
is also clear is that not many people are going to develop free XSLT 2.0
processors for the fun or kudos of it. Amateurs are asking serious questions
about whether they can commit the time, and corporations are asking serious
questions about the business case for developing free software.
To be honest, I can't think of many areas where there are multiple
open-source products implementing the same specification. It's rather odd
that we should even imagine that this should be a normal state of affairs.
If we need XSLT 2.0 processors that cover gaps in the market, then we may
have to be prepared to pay for them.
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.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>
--~--