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

Re: SAX2 and XSLT processors

---

---

David Megginson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Oren Ben-Kiki writes:
> >Is there a reason for this selection - that is, can you define the
> >xml.org "turf" such a way that given a spec for something we'd know
> >in advance whether it belongs in the SAX2 "core" or not?
>
>Support for a spec other than XML belongs in the core if there are
>many existing dependencies on it.


By this I gather you mean many other specs depending on it - as opposed to
applications? I suppose that's a consistent measure. It is however an
unstable one. Suppose the W3C will release dependent specs in the future? Of
course that would be a problem only if someone else specifies XSLT features
in the meanwhile, which I find unlikely.

Note that using the number of applications using the feature is also
unstable - we hope, for example, that the number of XSLT applications will
be growing. Still, this (number of applications) makes more sense to me then
using the number of specs.

At any rate, either of these measures means we won't see plug-and-play XSLT
processors for a long while. Well, if nobody else is worried about being
able to switch processors, who am I to complain? After all I'll be getting
paid for writing the wrappers for each new relevant XSLT processor in the
mean while.

Share & Enjoy,

    Oren Ben-Kiki


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

---