Home. 
.

transparent

transparent

transparent

Altova Mailing List Archives


RE: [xml-dev] Saxon and Sun Serializer problems?

From: "Michael Kay" <mike@--------.--->
To: "'Andrew Welch'" <andrew.j.welch@-----.--->, "'G. Ken Holman'"
Date: 6/1/2009 10:48:00 AM
> > From http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xslt-19991116
> >
>  XSLT is not intended as a completely general-purpose XML
>  transformation language. Rather it is designed primarily
>  for the kinds of transformations that are needed when XSLT
>  is used as part of XSL.
> 

I often quote this sentence as an example of where you need to read between
the lines of a specification. Although I have no specific knowledge of how
this sentence came to be there, I have always imagined that it was probably
added as a result of a somewhat inconclusive debate about some language
feature that someone considered either too general-purpose or too
special-purpose; such a discussion about one specific feature can quickly
degenerate into a philosophical discussion about the general strategy,
probably with two people taking strongly opposed views and everyone else
looking at their watches and wondering how long it will go on; after wasting
a couple of hours on such a discussion, no-one likes to close it without an
action, so the chair calls a vote and a sentence like this gets added to the
spec to reflect the majority view. Note the caveats: "completely",
"primarily". What such a sentence tells you is not that the WG had a clear
view on the matter, but rather the converse: that the question was
considered open for debate.

This kind of thing can also arise from a challenge that refers back to the
original requirements:

"The charter says the language should be for styling, but you've designed a
general transformation language".

"Oh no we haven't: look, it says so here."

Or it could be a defence against a challenge that the language was not
general-purpose enough:

"We need a facility to call trigonometric functions"

"Oh no you don't, this isn't a general-purpose programming language: look,
it says so here."

From reading the sequence of drafts leading up to XSLT 1.0, one gets the
impression that the language became more general-purpose with each
successive draft, so what the WG was actually doing was at odds with what it
claimed to be doing in this sentence.

Regards,

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/
http://twitter.com/michaelhkay 




_______________________________________________________________________

XML-DEV is a publicly archived, unmoderated list hosted by OASIS
to support XML implementation and development. To minimize
spam in the archives, you must subscribe before posting.

[Un]Subscribe/change address: http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/
Or unsubscribe: xml-dev-unsubscribe@l...
subscribe: xml-dev-subscribe@l...
List archive: http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php



transparent
Print
Mail
Like It
Disclaimer
.

These Archives are provided for informational purposes only and have been generated directly from the Altova mailing list archive system and are comprised of the lists set forth on www.altova.com/list/index.html. Therefore, Altova does not warrant or guarantee the accuracy, reliability, completeness, usefulness, non-infringement of intellectual property rights, or quality of any content on the Altova Mailing List Archive(s), regardless of who originates that content. You expressly understand and agree that you bear all risks associated with using or relying on that content. Altova will not be liable or responsible in any way for any content posted including, but not limited to, any errors or omissions in content, or for any losses or damage of any kind incurred as a result of the use of or reliance on any content. This disclaimer and limitation on liability is in addition to the disclaimers and limitations contained in the Website Terms of Use and elsewhere on the site.

.
.

transparent

transparent