This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: xslt namespace
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: [xsl] xslt namespace
- From: Wendell Piez <wapiez at mulberrytech dot com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2001 13:49:51 -0400
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
Hi Jon,
At 10:46 AM 10/10/01, you wrote:
>my main problem is with the xsl namespace (i know what a namespace is). i
>always use xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform" but i also see
>xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xsl" which i assume is a working draft.
>but is
>WD-xsl xsl or xslt?
Really, it's neither. One language that uses that namespace (undoubtedly
the source of your problems, since no other implementation that recognizes
the namespace survives in real-world use; they were all upgraded or
shelved) is called "XSL" by its vendor; this language is somewhat related
to one of the XSL working drafts. (I say "somewhat" because even for the
few months when it was current, it was partial and also contained
proprietary extensions.)
In a post yesterday, I suggested that if XSL is cheese, this other language
is a soy-based Cheese Food Product.
> i'm using the gnome libxsl and it doesn't like the
>WD-xsl but people keep sending me stuff with WD-xsl in saying how simple
>things
>aren't working and can i fix it.
That's a pity: join the ranks of the firefighters. This particular blaze
has been burning on-and-off ever since that "XSL" was first released.
As a preventative, you might try to discern how these people are educating
themselves about XSL, to see whether there's anything you can do to steer
them clear of "WD-xsl". Unfortunately the problem is general and very
widely felt.
> i was thinking maybe if they were using an
>xsl-fo namespace they might not be getting all the xslt elements.
Nope, that has nothing to do with it.
>i know there's nothing at "http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-xsl" but from a user
>point of view it would be logical to put either the spec there or a note about
>what it is. i've gone to the w3 site but it's full of so much fud about
>different things i can't tell what is current, what is redundant and what is a
>prototype. is there a simple list anywhere, and have they changed the version
>system to something more ummm... standard?
W3C doesn't document this problem for ... any number of reasons, one
imagines. (It's hard to know where to start.)
But the archives of this list are replete with various efforts to dampen
any reliance on that language-called-by-its-vendor-"XSL".
>xml is *nearly* as bad as java for all the silly buzz words.
Sadly true, but what's the alternative? the evolution of technology *is*
the evolution of language.
Cheers,
Wendell
======================================================================
Wendell Piez mailto:wapiez@mulberrytech.com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list