While I agree on the benefits, I do not think that's an effect
of being able to /compile/ libraries, but more generally of
having a standard /packaging/ format (kind of a JAR containing a
set of XSLT modules and a descriptor of them, for instance.)
Both have a great effect. Whenever a developer considers producing an
XSLT application, which uses an XSLT library, often the blocking
factor is the necessity to distribute to the customers not only the
application itself, but also hundreds of files that are part of the
XSLT library being used.
I agree that even a mechanism to provide something like a zipped
archive in a single file solves this problem and this would be
sufficient if it were not less - performant than having the stylesheet
modules already compiled.
Im not too sure compilation is a big deal, the user can always compile
the lot themselves.
Some kind of archive format would be really good - is anything in the
pipeline for 2.1?
Something simple like:
<xsl:include href="library.sar"/>
where library.sar is "stylesheet archive", a standard zip with some
kind of meta pointing to the primary stylesheet.
--
Andrew Welch
http://andrewjwelch.com
Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--