This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
RE: object-oriented XSL
- From: "Hunsberger, Peter" <Peter dot Hunsberger at stjude dot org>
- To: "'xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com'" <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2002 08:41:12 -0500
- Subject: RE: [xsl] object-oriented XSL
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> > There are times I wish that XSLT did have a better OO model, but that is
in
> > the way that includes and imports work. XSLT 2 with the ability to have
> > multi-modal templates may solve some more of this requirement. However,
> > there are still some gaps. I'm still at a loss as to what your hoping
to
> > achieve beyond what existing languages can do?
>
> what if defining a new XPath function was as easy as writing a named
> template:
[snip]
> and what if you could define types and associate functions with them,
> wouldn't that be pretty cool?
Personally, I'd much rather have first order functions in XSLT and the
ability to match on schema based types (some of which is coming). I can't
see that what you're proposing gains me over those capabilities?
> quickly this takes us far from what XSLT is and what it does,
??? From how it works, yes, but not from what it does...
> add to this non-XSLT dynamically typed language a bit of function
> overloading, (multiple?) inheritance, polymorphism and module building
> constructs and i think that you really got something to kick .NET and C#
> back down the hole they came from. want to write XML web services?
Umm, I think Java already does that...
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list