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

Re: [xsl] Are there any free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processors?

Subject: Re: [xsl] Are there any free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processors?
From: James Fuller <james.fuller.2007@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 23:05:50 +0100

Hello Roger,

I don't necc agree or disagree with anything you say (apologies for
ambiguity), though I will make a few observations.

* Who are the people you are trying to convince to use XSLT vnext ? ..
it might be that these folks will never learn such a language as XSLT
e.g. are the docheads ? datageeks ? Javascript folk ? There is a limit
to adoption based on many other variables then just free ... though
free is admittedly a very gentle onramp

* SAXON has different versions, XQilla comes to mind for the xpath
side ... historically a successful technology has not needed a large
number of reference implementations to be widely adopted ... fact be
told I think xslt and xquery (xpath) jointly holds the crown for
highest # of open source and commercial implementations that i;ve ever

* XML is emerging from its decade long hype curve (dont worry these
hype curves are getting quicker e.g. the js/json/nodejs ppl are going
into their own trough of disillusionment soon) ... markup is not going
away in our lifetime, its part of the DNA of software, the web and
actually an astounding number of long tail type (look at all those
extensible vocabularies out there). We will continue to need tools
like XSLT/XPATH 3.0  ... I believe there are folks working on XSLT 3.0
(cant quite remember details).

You know ... sometimes I think we made a rod for our collective backs
by insisting on open source (and developing and contributing too it)
over the past few decades.

Context gets forgotten e.g. the quality of commercial software
(Because of open source embracement) has got a lot higher over these
past decades ... younger developers don't encounter all those false
commercial abstractions that were being built into software (sure
still happens) and we are in a situation where people expect a free

At some point, I am guessing that this model could change;either
because the average age of developer who contributes will be middle
aged (children tend to slow down OS contribs; no offense implied to
anyone!), but more likely because the lessons of the past will be
forgotten and the scales will tip back towards commercial software
(because the economics don't really work out the other way). I don't
know, all I'm saying is nothing is truly free.

I wonder how your colleagues would respond to the question 'Would your
company be willing to sponsor someone to build XSLT 3.0 free software'

cheers, Jim Fuller

On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:58 PM, Costello, Roger L. <costello@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> I only know of one fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processor -- SAXON.
> And it's not free.
> Are there any free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processors?
> I believe that it is important there be at least one free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processor.
> Here's why: The people I work with think along these lines:
>      XSLT and XPath are nice but not
>      essential. If I have to pay for an
>      XSLT/XPath processor, then I certainly
>      will not use XSLT or XPath. Why
>      should I? I can use Java and it's free.
> You may not agree with their logic and it may be faulty, but that's the way many people think.
> So, if there is no free, fully-compliant XSLT/XPath 3.0 processor, I doubt that XSLT/XPath 3.0 will get any uptake by the people I work with.
> Comments?
> /Roger

Current Thread