[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments
Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 19:48:07 -0700 |
> | Extension functions specify particular functionality > | be carried out, and do not specify an implementation. > > This holds for built-in extensions. > > In addition to supporting built-in extensions, many popular > processors support a built-in extension element that > allows users to create their own user-written extension > functions in any namespace. > > This latter case is the case that <xsl:script> is trying > to standardize. Binding a user-written implementation to > a namespace. The <xsl:script> element could just as well > be called: > > <xsl:associate-user-written-extension-function-implementation-with-namespace/> I don't understand. Do you mean msxml:script? I hardly think that association helps your case. > | Scripts are embedded code of a completely different language > | with it's own interpreter, etc. > > | Thus, enumeration of additional required > | functionality is a very hard problem. > > What's needed is to specify the various contracts > at the boundary points between the XSLT processor > and the extension function implementation language > environment. These are the concrete details provided > in XSLT 1.1 for IDL/DOM2, Java/DOM2, and ECMAScript DOM2 > bindings. xsl:script is a matter of technical argument. The language binding issue is where politics comes in. There is no doubt that XSLT 1.1 as is creates a caste system of languages. If Java developers decide to standardize such bindings, or ECMAScript or Python developers for that matter, why don't they do so in a separately layered specification? -- Uche Ogbuji Principal Consultant uche.ogbuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx +1 303 583 9900 x 101 Fourthought, Inc. http://Fourthought.com 4735 East Walnut St, Ste. C, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA Software-engineering, knowledge-management, XML, CORBA, Linux, Python XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] syntax sugar for call-tem, Clark C. Evans | Thread | Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments, Steve Muench |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.1 comments (in def, Uche Ogbuji | Date | Re: [xsl] XPath over DOM, Uche Ogbuji |
Month |