[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Note from XSL WG on Extension Concerns
Subject: Note from XSL WG on Extension Concerns From: "Steve Muench" <smuench@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 01:18:58 -0700 |
Dave, Edd, Leigh, and other XSLT'ers, In the last week or so, Dave Pawson, Edd Dumbill, Leigh Dodds, myself and others have been involved in discussions on xml-dev and xsl-List about the ways we can better guarantee portability of XSLT extension implementations and simplify the lives of XSLT users by unifying the namespaces of commonly-used extensions. We wanted to let you know that the W3C XSL Working Group members -- including the implementors of XT, Saxon, LotusXSL/Xalan, MSXSL, NovellXSL, and OracleXSL -- are aware of the issues. We are both actively and cooperatively investigating the possible approaches we can take in future releases of the XSLT specification to improve things for users. In the XSLT 1.0 recommendation we strove for a flexible mechanism to *enable* extensions so the user community could help show us with their own code the clever and useful ways that they want the technology to go in the future. As evidenced by your concerns, it's clear that the ability to easily write extensions has encouraged innovation and been a spark-plug for great ideas. We have already had some discussion on the work involved and continue to monitor user feedback on the topic from xsl-list. For example, after our survey of existing XSLT processor implementations vis a vis support for extensions, one data point that popped out was that every Java-based XSLT Processor has implemented Java language extensions *functions* in a fairly similar way (modulo namespaces). But for extension elements and non-Java implementations of XSLT, the similarities aren't so obvious. Since we are currently in the process of having the group rechartered for a post 1.0 effort, we cannot be more precise at the moment. However, we plan to proceed with the specifics of addressing as many of the concerns as possible, in a "biggest-bang-for-the-buck" priority order, as an important part of our new charter. Discussions among XSLT users on these email lists regarding what are the most important problems to tackle first are clearly of value to us as input to this process. ______________________________________________________________ Steve Muench, Lead XML Evangelist & Consulting Product Manager Business Components for Java Dev't Team, Oracle Corporation Primary Oracle Rep to the XSL Working Group XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Where is a good mailing list on XML, Marcel Ruff | Thread | Why don't this work?, Westerlund, Malin |
RE: relative and base URIs when usi, Linda van den Brink | Date | Re: relative and base URIs when usi, michael gruber |
Month |