This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: ANNOUNCE: Petition to withdraw xsl:script from XSLT 1.1
- To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: [xsl] ANNOUNCE: Petition to withdraw xsl:script from XSLT 1.1
- From: "Clark C. Evans" <cce at clarkevans dot com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 14:59:07 -0500 (EST)
- Reply-To: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, Eric van der Vlist wrote:
> I hope I am not too heavily biased by the RDBMS vendor I was working for
> at that time, but I remember many constraints such as cursors being
> considered as static variables that had a huge impact on the programming
> style that did not exist when you were using the native APIs that where
> roughly similar to ODBC or JDBC.
Oh yea! I completely agree that Embedded SQL in C was a nightmare
of a language. And in general, I prefer component based mechanisms
through a clean API abstrction layer instead -- which is what I
feel is needed with XSLT (and you mention this below).
> The basic problem of embedding a language into another is the mixing
> of instructions with different scopes...
Neat point. I've never thought of it that way!
> To come back to to XSLT embedding XSLT within a general purpose language
> would be as bad an idea as embedding the general language within XSLT
Well, I personally agree with this, but I didn't want to
preclude this as I know there are people out there that
love embeding one language within another.
I concede that the first point was poorly worded.
I was trying to say "just don't embedd X language in XSL",
not "please embeed XSL in language X". My bad.
Perhaps this should be listed as another 'bug in
the proposal.
Clark
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list