[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: Florent Georges <darkman_spam@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2013 01:11:38 +0000 (GMT)

Adam Retter wrote:

  Hi,

> 1) You have to extend pkg spec as its not yet
complete or mature
> enough.  We have our own bits built-on-top, should be
made common.

  To be fair, eXist is able to build on top of it because it has
been
designed as such.  Its goal was to be a simple, low-level piece of the
architecture, extensible for more dedicated work.  The goal was not to
be a
web app format for instance, but one could (and some have) build
such a format
based on the core packaging system.

> 2) CXAN is a single server and there is
no process for uploading
> remotely.  You have to ask and make arrangements to
get stuff put on
> there.

  There is a web form to upload packages on the
website.  There is
also a test server at http://test.cxan.org/ with public
credentials.
The main website has no public credentials; I am happy to give
access
to anyone uploading libraries, but using the test server is a first
step, yes.

  Of course the website and the feature set can be improved, and I
am
happy to receive code contributions.  Maybe Github would be easier for
others to contribute, true, but SVN on Google Code is not a blocker
issue, is
it?

  I understand it can be frustrating not to have the system behaving
and
offering exactly all you want, but that is how it works, by using
it and
contributing, you improve it push it in the direction you
chose.

> 3)
Governance, EXPath project still seems to be one man in control
> of the
resources.

  Trust me, that man does not want that :-)  That's also why
EXPath is
a W3C group now, with two chairs.  But we're talking about something
different then.  EXPath is about writing specs for extensions.
Everyone's
welcome, but this is a different business than writing and
gathering
libraries.

  But I heard that argument quite often, and I think it is more or
less founded.  But honestly I am not sure how we can improve this.  If
you
have any precise ideas, I'm more than interested.

  By the way, I'll be happy
to show anyone how to upload libraries on
CXAN at XML Prague, for those who
are coming.  Or even to show how to
adapt their labraries to the EXPath
packaging (which really, is now
quite easy with XProject
<http://expath.org/modules/xproject/>,
either from the command line or from
oXygen).

  Wrt CXAN, maybe a step-by-step guide could help?  Or maybe a
series
of screencasts could be interesting to explain how to package properly
a library, how to upload it, how to use CXAN from a user point of
view, etc. 
Unfortunately I am not very good at screencasts, so any
help welcome :-)

 
But the real important point for CXAN to be sucessful (and any
useful, as a
matter of fact), is to have libraries to offer.  And to
come back to the very
initial subject, I expect XQuery/XSLT 3.0 to
boost library offer, by having
more facilities for library authors.

  So if you (yes, y'all) have
interesting pieces of code, could be
XSLT, XQuery, XProc, but also standard
schemas or other XML
technologies, package them up and upload them to CXAN! 
And if you
don't know exactly how to proceed, don't be afraid and ask :-)

 
Regards,

-- 
Florent Georges
http://fgeorges.org/
http://h2oconsulting.be/


Current Thread
Keywords