This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: using default params?
David Carlisle <davidc@nag.co.uk> writes:
> better to use node-set on systems that support it.
> select="xt:node-set($foo)"/>
yes, sure, but of course I would prefer very much not to use an extension...
> > and the same goes for use-attribute-sets: why isn't it possible to use
> > a computed name for this parameter ??
> pass
I assume that means that you can't comment on this
> > After an initial excitement over XSLT I'm now in the state where it
> > feels a bit like TeX:
>
> You do know how many thousands of hours I've contributed to latex
> support don't you?, By `like TeX' you must mean that as a
> compliment... :-)
yes, sure, I was often amazed about what you managed to do with tex.
> > Why didn't they simply use a full
> > featured scheme or clisp for the style language...
>
> They did use scheme. It was called dsssl.
Sure... that's of course the reason fo my comment....
> No one used it because it had too many (
which is an exceptionally stupid argument IMHO
> Actually some people (including me) did use it, and dsssl-list is still
> reasonably active, but it's just so much easier to type
> <this>...</this> than (this...) that all the hype is with XSL.
:-) By the way, is dssl a full fledged implementation of scheme
(tailrecursive, closures, you-name-it...) ??? If yes, it's a shame
that xslt is so weak in comparison, and is becoming the standard while
dssl doesn't play a role in the web/xml part of the game.
(this is of course completely off-topic for a xsl list, sorry.)
jtl
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list