Re: [xslt] key() in match pattern of xsl:key

On Sat, 10 Dec 2005, Daniel Veillard wrote:

>   I have been told that libxslt was not a proper XSLT implementation one
> too many time on that frigging list, so I won't read to any of it anymore, 
> for good or bad. If someone wants to discuss libxslt here is the place, 
> I don't have time nor willingness to follow the one at mulberrytech anymore.

Fair enough.  I'm new to both lists, so I don't know any of the history.

I'm at a loss for what to do at this point.  On the one hand, I don't want 
to step outside the bounds of XSLT 1.0.  On the other hand, the efficiency 
boost of keys referencing keys is best case O(n^2) down to best case O(n).  
I could just say, well, I'm adhering to 1.0 except that I'm borrowing this 
one feature that will be available in 2.0 because it just seems so 
impossible to live without it.

Do you see XSLT 2.0 in libxslt's future?  In light of the discovery that 
keys referencing keys is supposed to be an error in 1.0, are you still 
willing to allow it? Have you ever considered having a --strict flag (or 
--non-strict) for xsltproc to select whether extensions like this should 
be permitted?



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]