[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Jonathan,
> My own feeling is that XSLT 1.0/XPath 1.0 are good enough such that
> folks who want to avoid the overhead of XPath2/XQuery can indeed do
> that -- just use XPath 1.0/XSLT 1.0 -- people should resist the
> temptation to 'upgrade' to the latest version number just because it
> exists (writing from an NT4.0 box, and perfectly happy doing so)
But there are plenty of *other* things in XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 that
are absolutely essential, such as the well-known improvements of no
more result tree fragments, support for grouping, multiple output
documents, user-defined functions in XSLT, date values, conditional
expressions, testing node equality, regular expression support and so
on.
What you're saying is that the current users of XSLT can either choose
XSLT 1.0, which doesn't meet our requirements for one set of reasons,
or XSLT 2.0, which doesn't meet our requirements for another set of
reasons. Of course nothing's ever 100% what you want, but it's
incredibly frustrating that XPath 2.0 is being written around the
requirements of XQuery rather than the existing users of XPath 1.0 in
XSLT (or indeed any other of XPath's "host languages" such as XForms,
XPointer, even XML Schema).
Cheers,
Jeni
---
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com/
|
