- From: James Fuller <jim@webcomposite.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 07:31:16 +0200
- To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
- Cc: XProc WG <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
On 8 August 2013 02:36, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote: > Let me explain the use case a bit better. I have documents that are typed, > often on the root element, with specific RDFa types. The derived type is > computed against the @vocab attribute (and others) along with the @typeof > attribute. I want to expose an extension function so I can do something > like this: > > <p:choose> > <p:when test="rdfa:is-type(/*,'http://example.com/Book')"> > So, I really just want a way in p:library to declare these functions. I > could imagine just importing an XSLT library directly but I wonder whether > that is technical feasible given existing implementations. its an interesting idea and I think it would leverage other XML technologies reuse mechanisms. In MarkLogic land, allowing XSLT to import xquery modules proves to be a big winner and I suspect the reverse would be true as well. We could consider overloading p:import to be able to load in functions, in the scope of the current pipeline or a p:import in a p:library. Heck … why not javascript as well or whatever else an impl may decide ? We could add a content-type attribute as the means for unambiguously identifying function library. For example, with the xproc impl I am working on, it would be straightforward to load in xquery modules whose functions could be made available, though I don't know how this would work with XSLT and would have to tinker about calabash/saxon as an example to fully understand how an impl would achieve this. J
Received on Thursday, 8 August 2013 05:31:42 UTC