[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

[xsl] Re: alternative for modes

---

---

"Peter Billen" <peter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:20040212153517.C093537E78@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> I thought it's based on functions of exsl (fe. exslt:node-set()) ?

Mike was referring to the main idea underlying FXSL -- it is indeed
independent of the xxx:node-set() function.

In FXSL *some* templates use exslt:node-set(), there are other templates
that don't need this extension function.

Of course, in FXSL for XSLT 2.0 no template uses a node-set() extension
function.


Cheers,

Dimitre Novatchev,
FXSL developer,

http://fxsl.sourceforge.net/ -- the home of FXSL
Resume: http://fxsl.sf.net/DNovatchev/Resume/Res.html



>
> Peter
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Kay
> Sent: donderdag 12 februari 2004 16:28
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [xsl] alternative for modes
>
> >
> > I might be looking into Dimitre's FXSL, but I can't use it in
> > this situation, since it's a school exercise and I have to
> > use standard XSLT specifications (no extensions allowed).
>
> Dimitre's FXSL technique uses completely standard XSLT 1.0 (not quite as
> the designers of the language expected it to be used, but nevertheless
> 100% legitimate).
>
> Michael Kay
>
>
> >
> > So there is nothing else possible than some crap of
> > if-conditions, to 'simulate' several modes in one template/function?
> >
> > Thanks for your input,
> >
> > Peter
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > Michael Kay
> > Sent: donderdag 12 februari 2004 11:58
> > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [xsl] alternative for modes
> >
> > > As I mentioned above, 'generalTemplate' can be called on
> > > several places in the template, because everytime I need the
> > > same calculations, ... on the 'root'-tag. But each time (in
> > > every other place), I actually need different manipulations
> > > on the 'child'-tag.
> >
> > In effect, you want a higher-order function/template that
> > accepts a function/template as a parameter and then calls
> > that function/template.
> >
> > This is precisely what Dimitre's FXSL approach does. You
> > can't supply a template as a parameter, but you can supply a
> > node that acts as a surrogate for the template, so that when
> > you apply-templates to that node, the template that's invoked
> > depends on which node was supplied.
> >
> > Michael Kay
> >
> >
> >  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> >
> >
> >  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> >
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>
>




 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

---