Subject: portability. (Re: microsoft latest, bug with extension elements )? From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:37:22 -0700 |
> more to the point, I want to distribute my TEI stylesheets so that > they'll be useable by any processor (to the best of its ability) > without any further ado. Sounds like very exciting occupation. I'l be glad to know how far will you get ( I gave up long time ago because of extensions ). Maybe what you meant to say is "useable by some number ( 4? ) of XSLT processors" ? > Or, I can just > > - wait for XSLT 1.1 > - wait for processors to all be compliant > > neither of which may be that long Honestly - the simplest workaround I see is to write 'extremely portable XSLT-stylesheets' ( I think this task is a bit hypotetical, but whatever ) is to write them not in XSLT, but to use the preprocessor. With preprocessor your xml2html script will be one line longer, there will be no overhead ( run-time checking for 10 different engines in every 'non-portable' place may eat significant resources ) + you can make your stylesheets to run on really any XSLT processor with bigger probability. BTW. I see some other problem here. ;-) The problem is "SAXON is MS of XSLT" ;-) People are already building on top of SAXON's extensions and this kills almost any way to port their stylesheets to any other processor. I have not made my mind on this effect yet, but I have to admit that this effect really exists ;-) Rgds.Paul. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Thread | Re: portability. (Re: microsoft lat, Sebastian Rahtz | |
Date | Re: portability. (Re: microsoft lat, Paul Tchistopolskii | |
Month |