Hello Steve:

> As far as I can tell, <xsl:functions> is a fairly close mapping to <xsl:script>,
> and extension functions, plus the new mathematical and string operators, do a
> large portion of what <xsl:eval> did. The proof of the pudding would be in
> actually translating existing pages that use <xsl:eval> into the new syntax--I'm
> not ready to take a position on the relative merits of the tags, since I've
> never needed them.

We have several pages that utilize these tags so I'm gonna give your
suggestion a go.  Microsoft hasn't really defined in detail what exactly
the support is for these tags in IE 5.0.  It does appear however, that
the w3.org has implimented these tags for a very similar need in xsl.

I wonder why they would not simply name <xsl:functions> as <xsl:script>
unless they are significantly different.  This question also holds merit
when you consider that MS has people on the WD group.

I will try some experiments and see if anything interesting comes out. 
I will be away for a few days (my wife called it a "weekend" or
something) but this will be done by Monday.

Duane Nickull

> 
> --
> - Steve Dahl
> sdahl@xxxxxxxxxxx
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list