This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: portability. (Re: microsoft latest, bug with extension elements )?
> > When you need multiple outputs, invoke multiple
> > stylesheets. Write a script.
>
> I have 2500 gravestone records. I want each one in a separate
> file. you want I should run the stylesheet 2500 times?
Produce one large file and then split it into 2500 files with
trivial perl script. Ah, again , for some reason ( religion? )
you want to do everything in "plain XSLT" ( but still using the
hack which is not in XSLT standard ;-).
I give up. I simply don't understand what are you doing
and why are you doing that.
> > Yep. That's why "portable XSLT" looks impossible to me.
> until XSLT 1.1 adds that functionality....
I have no stock and I'm not participating in any gambling.
Gotta know the estimate for XSLT 1.1 ? I think at that point
of time we could be using some different XSLT engines ;-)
> > And when you have saxon:evaluate it is hard to resists using it ;-)
>
> i have never even been tempted, let alone inhaled. but then my usage
> of XSLT is naive.
I'm of course also not using it ( XT has no such beast ), but
sometimes I miss it. For example writing grep in SAXON
is trivial because of this feature. Grep in Ux ( XT ) was very
much hacking ( generate the stylesheet and execute it
on the fly ) ... But as a result - Ux's grep it is more portable
than if it will be written with saxon:evaluate ;-)
Rgds.Paul.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list