This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request?)
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and idrefs - XSLT2 request?)
- From: Francis Norton <francis at redrice dot com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 11:09:42 +0100
- References: <008201c15522$9f922a50$2100a8c0@swiftnet.tec>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Could I include Regular Expressions and Extension Functions in XSLT as
part of the new v.2 wish list? Providing those two would really open for
XSLT's organic expansion.
Francis.
Chris Bayes wrote:
>
> ERH,
> Damn good idea.
> The changes for 1.1 and xslt that have come up since then will be way
> overdue by the time schema support is shoehorned in. That there is not
> even a murmur of a date fot v2 is a bit worying. We already have a
> fallback mechanism so let's push it another level and have v2 (which
> should really be 1.1+) and v3 (with schema).
>
> That way we get all the pleasure and no pain.
>
> Ciao Chris
>
> XML/XSL Portal
> http://www.bayes.co.uk/xml
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com
> > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com] On Behalf Of
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > Sent: 13 October 2001 18:10
> > To: xsl-list@lists.mulberrytech.com
> > Cc: xsl-editors@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Schemas in XSLT 2.0 (Was: Re: [xsl] keys and
> > idrefs - XSLT2 request?)
> >
> >
> > At 4:12 PM +0100 10/10/01, Jeni Tennison wrote:
> >
> > >So, the first question is whether XSLT 2.0 should mandate support of
> > >XML Schema within XSLT processors (i.e. you've got to be able to
> > >validate against XML Schema in order to be a conformant XSLT 2.0
> > >processor).
> >
> > I propose something even more radical. Drop schemas
> > completely from XPath 2.0/XSLT 2.0. First do everything that
> > can be done without considering schemas; e.g. better
> > grouping, multiple document output, XHTML output method, text
> > inclusions, explicit matching of default namespaces, etc.
> > This could be implemented and finished much more quickly, and
> > would be useful in and of itself.
> >
> > Then, and only then, begin work on XPath 3.0/XSLT 3.0 which
> > would consider only issues relevant to PSVI support. By this
> > time we might actually have some schema aware APIs to build
> > on top of.
> >
> > Furthermore this would also make XSLT 2.0 and 3.0 a lot
> > easier to teach and learn because it would be more obvious
> > what depended on what. You wouldn't, for example, have to
> > learn schemas in order to support multiple output documents.
> > --
> >
> > +-----------------------+------------------------+-------------------+
> > | Elliotte Rusty Harold | elharo@metalab.unc.edu | Writer/Programmer |
> > +-----------------------+------------------------+------------
> > -------+
> > | The XML Bible, 2nd Edition (Hungry Minds, 2001) |
> > | http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/books/bible2/ |
> > | http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=0764547607/cafeaulaitA/ |
> > +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
> > | Read Cafe au Lait for Java News:
> > http://www.cafeaulait.org/ |
> > | Read Cafe con Leche for
> > XML News: http://www.ibiblio.org/xml/ |
> > +----------------------------------+---------------------------------+
> >
> > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
> >
> >
>
> XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list