Interesting discussion. I has similar concerns around compiling and
archiving as mentioned by folks.
But is compiling really that much of a barrier? One could take a couple
tacs. First, ship the XSLTs with a processor, that way you have closer to a
self contained unit. Second, you could hit 80% of folks by going with a
pretty small number of processors. I work with a lot of different clients
and I could hit virtually all of them with 4 processors or less. Not
perfect, but what in this world is?
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kay [mailto:mike(_at_)saxonica(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2009 4:37 AM
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: RE: [xsl] linkedin discussion of "can you sell an XSLT?"
JVM byte-code or .NET IL code both are not processor-specific.
Fortunately, there is no need for XSLT byte-code :)
I can't imagine anyone compiling XSLT to byte-code that doesn't need the
support of a processor-specific runtime library, so the compiled code will
inevitably be tied to a particular XSLT processor.
Regards,
Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay
--~------------------------------------------------------------------
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>
--~--