[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>
>
> I was wondering how this list feels about the current draft of XSLT2.0
> and it's use of XML Schemas. IMHO, the choice of outsourcing this "type
> importing" functionality in a way to be transparent to XSLT, could
> result in the ability to use types from various schema languages but
> XSLT 2.0 from what I understand does take XML Schema for granted. Anyone
> want to make it clearer for me?
> Regards,
Oo'er. Been there. Done that. Can't even bear to wear the tee shirt.
There was a long debate on this and related matters in early May on this list.
I, for one, can't afford another thread on the topic again until I have the time to fight properly. I'll summarize my position: IMHO unless the specs change radically, or at least add conformance levels so that I can ignore the WXS and static typing stuff, I do not expect to either implement nor use XPath 2.0 or XSLT 2.0. This is after having implemented the 1.0 specs well before they became RECs.
--
Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc.
http://uche.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org http://fourthought.com
Track chair, XML/Web Services One (San Jose, Boston): http://www.xmlconference.com/
DAML Reference - http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2002/05/01/damlref.html
The Languages of the Semantic Web - http://www.newarchitectmag.com/documents/s=2453/new1020218556549/index.html
XML, The Model Driven Architecture, and RDF @ XML Europe - http://www.xmleurope.com/2002/kttrack.asp#themodel
|
