Hi Mukul,
It's been many years since I've been directly involved with Xalan, or even XSLT. But here's some feedback.
> Interestingly, I can see at this location http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xalan/java/branches/, following folders
>
> xslt20 & xslt20-compiled
>
> Any thoughts, what is the functionality currently contained in above folders?
I think those were *very* early attempts to do XSLT 2.0 on Xalan? Would be interesting to get dates on these.
> Natively enhance Xalan's current XSLT 1.0 processor to a 2.0 processor, in a branch of its own.
I think it's better to start basically from a complete rewrite, on way or the other.
> Use Eclipse's XPath 2.0 processor (also known as PsychoPath XPath 2.0 processor), in the XSLT 2.0 codebase which Xalan would develop. This option saves us the effort of writing a native XPath 2.0 processor. But perhaps the cons is that, PsychoPath XPath 2.0 processor can accept only the DOM input to convert it to XDM.
I wonder how prohibitive it would be at this point to have a DOM-only processor.
> Is there any possibility of IBM donating in some way its XSLT 2.0 processor technology to Xalan? If it can be done, people will flock to the IBM derived Xalan's XSLT 2.0 processor.
I think it could be a possibility. Not sure it's wise or not... have to think about it a bit. But let me discuss with some folks in IBM to explore the options.
> Can we use Saxon's latest home edition XSLT 2.0 processor (its open source), and convert to to Xalan's XSLT 2.0 processor?
Hmm, seems on the surface to be a non-starter to me, just given it does not feel right.
> I think it'd be really great for Xalan to have a XSLT 2.0 processor as well (its 1.0 processor is just great).
I was writing some XSLT the other day, and was reminded what a cool and interesting language it is, despite it's somewhat tarnished reputation.
I was writing some XSLT the other day, and was reminded what a cool and interesting language it is, despite it's somewhat tarnished reputation.
To justify the work for a new processor, really there should be a core idea that makes it potentially unique and valuable, above the current state of the art. For myself, I'd love to see a 3.0 processor implemented in Typescript for client use.... but that's a huge order, and the technical feasibility is a huge challenge. Still, given the ability to do JSON transformations, and mix XML/JSON/XHTML, and throwing in the ability to do XQuery 3.0, it could be really exciting, from a functional viewpoint.
-scott
----- Original message -----
From: Mukul Gandhi <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Cc:
Subject: Re: XSLT 2.0 processor discussion
Date: Mon, May 28, 2018 6:57 AM
Interestingly, I can see at this location http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/xalan/java/branches/, following foldersxslt20 & xslt20-compiledAny thoughts, what is the functionality currently contained in above folders?On Sat, May 26, 2018 at 11:41 AM, Mukul Gandhi <[email protected]> wrote:Hi all,I've been tempted to bring this topic again, to this list. I think it'd be really great for Xalan to have a XSLT 2.0 processor as well (its 1.0 processor is just great). I'll attempt to enumerate following options with my notions of pros-and-cons, for Xalan to provide an XSLT 2.0 processor as well,1) Natively enhance Xalan's current XSLT 1.0 processor to a 2.0 processor, in a branch of its own. The effort and time to market for this, would be highest.2) Use Eclipse's XPath 2.0 processor (also known as PsychoPath XPath 2.0 processor), in the XSLT 2.0 codebase which Xalan would develop. This option saves us the effort of writing a native XPath 2.0 processor. But perhaps the cons is that, PsychoPath XPath 2.0 processor can accept only the DOM input to convert it to XDM.3) Is there any possibility of IBM donating in some way its XSLT 2.0 processor technology to Xalan? If it can be done, people will flock to the IBM derived Xalan's XSLT 2.0 processor.4) Can we use Saxon's latest home edition XSLT 2.0 processor (its open source), and convert to to Xalan's XSLT 2.0 processor? I believe, Saxon's open source products come with Mozilla Public License, and I'm not sure how suitable it is for having it in Xalan?I'd also suggest, that any XSLT 2.0 processor from Xalan should be schema-aware using Xerces's XSD processor.I'm still not thinking about XSLT 3.0, which is already a W3C spec. I think we should have XSLT 2.0 first.Needless to say, I'll be happy to participate in any such work.--Regards,Mukul Gandhi
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
