RE: xslt2 issues

Sidestepping David And Mike's comments for the minute:

> Say I define math:sqrt() using xsl:function in my stylesheet (which is
> nasty, deep, recursive XSLT). Say Mike has implemented math:sqrt() in
> Saxon. If I run the stylesheet with Saxon, I expect the better
> function to be used, and that has to be Mike's because Java is a lot
> better at doing square roots than XSLT (which can only estimate them).

The rationale here, 'Java is better than XSLT', is something I would
argue with. That is probably fine for Jeni T, I don't think it is 
right to say it is 'best' for everybody.
  
I don't think I want to take this any further until the DC comment
re ns is resolved.



> 
> Also, I think it's important to recognise that "end users" (the people
> actually seeing the results of the transformation) do not define their
> own functions. It seems to me that the the 'end user wins' argument is
> really an argument between the rights of those who view the result of
> the transformation and the rights of those who are authoring the
> stylesheet, which isn't really applicable in this case.

To my way of thinking the 'end user' here is the stylesheet author,
not the recipient of the styled source file.





> But please go ahead and prove me wrong. Can you provide an example of
> a function (in existence or imaginary) that you would want to override
> in your stylesheet by writing an implementation using XSLT instead,
> where it's impractical to write your own function in your own
> namespace instead, and use that?

Which is why I want to wait for the ns resolution (say's he,
chickening out v.quickly :-)

Though there are probably stylesheet author reasons why, say,
the exslt:something or other isn't quite right for him/her,
perhaps the date formatting isn't right for my locale?


Regards DaveP

- 

NOTICE: The information contained in this email and any attachments is 
confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the 
intended recipient you are hereby notified that you must not use, 
disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email's content. If 
you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender 
immediately and then delete the email and any attachments from your 
system.

RNIB has made strenuous efforts to ensure that emails and any 
attachments generated by its staff are free from viruses. However, it 
cannot accept any responsibility for any viruses which are 
transmitted. We therefore recommend you scan all attachments.

Please note that the statements and views expressed in this email 
and any attachments are those of the author and do not necessarily 
represent those of RNIB.

RNIB Registered Charity Number: 226227

Website: http://www.rnib.org.uk

Received on Friday, 4 January 2002 09:47:01 UTC