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

Re: [xsl] What implementations of XPath 3.0 exist at present?


Subject: Re: [xsl] What implementations of XPath 3.0 exist at present?
From: "Michael Kay mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2014 07:49:19 -0000

According to the Altova online help text, they currently support the whole of
XPath 3.0 and XQuery 3.0, while support for XSLT 3.0 is confined to
xsl:evaluate, try/catch, maps, and text value templates.

Such a shame that they are never around to answer questions directly.

Michael Kay
Saxonica
mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx
+44 (0118) 946 5893



On 12 Jul 2014, at 16:16, Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Thank you Michael,
>
> Based on the results from the provided link, there are these five
> different implementations of XPath 3.0 (three of them are
> implementations of XQuery 3.0), which have reported test results:
>
>     BaseX 7.7
>
>     EMC/xDB xDB_main_r2411365
>
>     Saxon-EE 9.5.1.1
>
>     XmlPrime 3.0.0.0
>
>     Zorba 2.9
>
>
> Also, thanks to the reply by Adam Retter:
>
>     eXist supports XQuery 3.0 natively, and by virtue of embedding
> Saxon also XSLT 3.0.
>
>
> There was also a hint that other implementations might exist (Altova
> mentioned explicitly) that haven't reported their test results.
>
> In addition here is a compacted copy of the xml-dev reply by John
> Cowan, which adds data about Mark Logic and throws more light on the
> level of support provided by some implementations to XSLT and XQuery
> 3.0, and also whether or not they are open source -- the data on Saxon
> has been obsoleted by Michael Kay's reply that the forthcoming "major
> Saxon release (9.6) will include full support for the basic
> conformance level of both specs in the open source HE product. (Note
> that the basic conformance level excludes higher order functions.)".
>
>
>       Saxon 9 (XSLT 3.0 and XQuery 3.0)
>       Proprietary version provides XSLT 3.0 and XQuery 3.0; the
> open-source version provides XSLT 2.0 and XQuery 1.0.
>
>       Mark Logic (XQuery 3.0, ??XSLT 3.0??)
>       Proprietary only; partial XQuery 3.0, XSLT unknown version.
>
>       BaseX  (XQuery 3.0, ??XSLT 3.0??)
>       Open source; XQuery 3.0; XSLT available outboard only
>
>       Zorba ???
>       Open source; XQuery 3.0; no XSLT.
>
>       ExistDb ???
>      Open source; partial XQuery 3.0;.XSLT available outboard only.
>    These are just the result of quick surveys, and may be out of date.
>
>
> Thanks to all who have responded -- now we have a better picture.
>
> Cheers,
> Dimitre
>
> On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 12:36 AM, Michael Kay <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Reported results for the XQuery/XPath 3.0 test suite can be found here:
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2011/QT3-test-suite/ReportingResults/
>>
>> Of course, not all implementors choose to submit their results (Altova
never does, for example), and some implementors may have progressed since
these reports were produced.
>>
>> Now that XPath 3.0 and XQuery 3.0 have reached recommendation status, the
next major Saxon release (9.6) will include full support for the basic
conformance level of both specs in the open source HE product. (Note that the
basic conformance level excludes higher order functions.)
>>
>> Michael Kay
>> Saxonica
>> mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> +44 (0118) 946 5893
>>
>>
>>
>> On 12 Jul 2014, at 05:27, Dimitre Novatchev dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx
<xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> I am trying to get a more or less exact number of the currently
>>> existing implementations of XPath 3.0.
>>>
>>> The ones I am aware of are:
>>>
>>> Saxon 9 (XSLT 3.0 and XQuery 3.0)
>>>
>>> Mark Logic (XQuery 3.0, ??XSLT 3.0??)
>>>
>>> BaseX  (XQuery 3.0, ??XSLT 3.0??)
>>>
>>> Zorba ???
>>>
>>> ExistDb ???
>>>
>>> other ???
>>>
>>> Which of these implementations are commercial and which have free
>>> and/or open source versions? I know that BaseX is open source, what
>>> about the rest of the existing XPath 3.0 implementations?
>>>
>>> Could you, please, help in filling up this list -- I believe that such
>>> information would be interesting and useful for all of us.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Cheers,
>>> Dimitre Novatchev


Current Thread
Keywords