Subject: xslt specification comment
From: "Smith, Brian BC SSI" <BS185791@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 07:45:32 -0500
|
In the specification it says:
NOTE: the XSL WG intends to define such a mechanism in a future
version of this specification or in a separate specification."
Referring to implementation hooks for extension functions.
Extension functions are very useful. I know that there are
many items on the plate of the committee, but please try to get a standard
for the implementation bindings.
I have used the extension functions in both XT and SAXON
and come to the conclusion that I can not use them for now
because there is standard way to define the bindings of
the extension functions into the parser. My preference is
something that does not require a specified base class. I
like the kludge that XT does...if this could be cleaned up...
Brian Smith
Shell Services International
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|