• From: DavePawson <davep@d...>
• To: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@C...>
• Date: Mon, 01 Jun 2009 14:58:33 +0100

G. Ken Holman wrote:

> I think it is more than folklore and you've remembered it correctly.  I 
> ask my students who have worked with XSLT if they have wondered why the 
> namespace prefix "xsl:" is used in examples instead of "xslt:". 

<grin/> Except by Ken H?



> The split happened the next year when the first draft of XSLT formalized 
> the details:
> 
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-xslt-19990421
>   "XSLT is also designed to be used independently of XSL. However,
>    XSLT is not intended as a completely general-purpose XML
>    transformation language. Rather it is designed primarily for the
>    kinds of transformation that are needed when XSLT is used as part
>    of XSL."

Which is almost funny, considering its current usage!
I think Andrew may be a fairly typical user of XSLT, almost
exclusively for general transformations.
   I think that is the split to which I referred, the WG listening
to the 'users' on XSLT list.


> 
> I know you were a DSSSL student of mine, Dave, but I'm not sure if that 
> was before or after December 1997 when I started adding XSL concepts to 
> the DSSSL syntax class.  Our pure XSLT classes, with syntax, didn't 
> start until 1999.
> 
> It has been a fun run!

Belgium, about 98 IIRC!



regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk

• References:
  • Re: Saxon and Sun Serializer problems?
    • From: Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@g...>
  • RE: Saxon and Sun Serializer problems?
    • From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
  • Re: Saxon and Sun Serializer problems?
    • From: DavePawson <davep@d...>
  • Re: Saxon and Sun Serializer problems?
    • From: "G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@C...>