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

Re: [xsl] New XSLT 3.0 Working Draft

Subject: Re: [xsl] New XSLT 3.0 Working Draft
From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:28:12 -0700

Re: XSLT in the broeser:

Have you heard of Saxon CE?

Dimitre Novatchev
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence.
To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk
Never fight an inanimate object
To avoid situations in which you might make mistakes may be the
biggest mistake of all
Quality means doing it right when no one is looking.
You've achieved success in your field when you don't know whether what
you're doing is work or play
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
I finally figured out the only reason to be alive is to enjoy it.

On Tue, Jul 10, 2012 at 11:17 AM, Michele R Combs <mrrothen@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Heh.   You're quite right.  Congratulations and yay for the new features, especially the accumulators and catch-ability :)
> I guess I was thinking of for example browsers being able to handle 2.0 features (which I don't think any can, can they?), but you're right of course, lots of people are using it internally.
> Michele
> suitably chastened
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Carlisle [mailto:davidc@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 10, 2012 2:14 PM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [xsl] New XSLT 3.0 Working Draft
> On 10/07/2012 19:01, Michele R Combs wrote:
> such a spoilsport:-) the correct response is "congratulations" or "interesting new features"! or something:-)
>> Since relatively few folks adopted 2.0
> How did you measure that? certainly almost all the traffic here has been
> xslt2 for years. (One of the shocks of looking at the xslt questions on stackoverflow where I look occasionally is that there is still there a tendency towards XSLT 1 use, which I found rather shocking really.
> Outside of a browser I'd not use xslt 1.
>  > what do we think the chances are of 3.0 being adopted?
> Crystal balls required for that bit...
> David

Current Thread