W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org > December 2008

Re: uuid question

From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2008 16:53:54 +0100
Message-ID: <ebaca5bf0812070753x4c06265dlacc5723db2bb1616@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
Cc: public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org

2008/12/7 Dave Pawson wrote:
> 2008/12/7 Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>:

>>  Using "extensibility hooks" provided by XPath but not defining
>> "extensions" ? ;-)

> No. I'm OK with any WD providing a consistent manner in which
> extension functions are written.
> I object to defining extensions within the WD.

  Well, I think that's not the spirit of the XPath REC.  Besides the
"regular" kind of extensions in other languages (defined by the
implementation or by the user using another language) XPath provides
to the host language the ability to define additional functions.

  See for instance key(), current(), generate-id(), and others in
XSLT.  I think those functions are good examples of additional
functions (instead of having defined corresponding XSLT instructions.)

  But that becomes more an XPath question.  Maybe we should switch to XSL List?

  Regards,

-- 
Florent Georges
http://www.fgeorges.org/
Received on Sunday, 7 December 2008 15:54:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 7 December 2008 15:54:30 GMT