RE: Yet Another V2 Request: Extension Functions via XSLT 2

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Fuller [mailto:jim@webcomposite.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 9:30 AM
> To: Toman, Vojtech
> Cc: XProc WG
> Subject: Re: Yet Another V2 Request: Extension Functions via XSLT 2
> 
> On 8 August 2013 09:24, Toman, Vojtech <vojtech.toman@emc.com> wrote:
> > See also a similar request in an older thread on xproc-dev:
> >
> > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xproc-dev/2012Jan/0023.html
> >
> > There is, I believe, also a similar entry in the XProcVNext wiki.
> >
> > But what about simply allowing to use XProc steps as XPath extension
> functions? That seems like a more robust and idiomatic solution than
> introducing "magic" mechanisms for native importing of
> XSLT/XQuery/whatnot modules.
> >
> 
> I agree that we should consider allowing folks to do this as well.
> 
> but I still opt for overloading of p:import as it would aid adoption ...
> a developer does not want to have to rewrite all their func libs into
> XProc steps ... if they have an existing investment in xquery/xslt they
> can be up and running with their libs immediately. Not to mention its
> boring to have to maintain a single function lib across both
> xquery/xslt and now xproc.

I was not thinking about rewriting their libraries in XProc. In many cases, simply wrapping the XSLT/XQuery library/function with a simple p:xslt/p:xquery step could be enough.

Regards,
Vojtech

--
Vojtech Toman
Consultant Software Engineer
EMC | Information Intelligence Group
vojtech.toman@emc.com
http://developer.emc.com/xmltech

Received on Thursday, 8 August 2013 07:34:43 UTC