Re: [xslt] Any interest in an alternative syntax for XSLT?

[Phil Shafer <phil juniper net>]

Liam R E Quin writes:
>Sam Wilmott gave a talk at Extreme Markup in Montréal this August about
>an alternate syntax he has worked on, inspired by Python.

http://www.extrememarkup.com/extreme/2006/e06-wednesday.html#wilmott

I don't see the paper, but I'm guessing this is about AFL:

http://www.wilmott.ca/afl/index.html

which is an alternate language, not just an alternate syntax.

>But there are a lot of XSLT tricks that make use of the fact that
>XSLT is represented in XML, and there was a talk (also at Extreme
>Markup) about higher-order programming in XSLT using some such
>tricks.

Yes, this is the win of SLAX, that you can produce the exact
same XML document without having to write XML.  SLAX statements
are mapped into XSLT elements in an XML document.  The normal
XML writing functions can then emit this document as text.

>I'd be happier if it were based on XSLT 2, which has
>some features to reduce the need e.g. to write XSLT transformations
>that produce XSLT which, when interpreted,... etc etc., and hence
>XSLT 2 might be easier in practice to decouple from the XML
>representation.

What are libxslt's plans for xslt2?

Thanks,
 Phil