I would throw my support to saxon as well, as well as xslt 2.0 it would give xquery, possibility to upgrade to the non-free saxon? would give xml-schema supported transformations, Michael Kay seems to have begun aggressively optimizing Saxon so I think it competes pretty well with the others in the market for speed, etc.
Cheers, Bryan Rasmussen -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Bruce D'Arcus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 6. januar 2006 15:48 Til: [email protected] Emne: [xml-dev] XSLT processor, language (was Re: [xml-dev] open office filter - extension functions, processor) On Jan 6, 2006, at 9:41 AM, Matthew L. Avizinis wrote: > Also, just now I noticed that in the 2.0 program/classes folder that > _both_ an xt.jar and a xalan.jar are present. You are indicating that > Xalan is now used by default? How can I test/verify this? (OOo xslt > filter debug information is noticeably lacking, i.e. xsl:message or > processor debug dump options, so I'm wondering how this is possible.) I have two questions about the XSLT support: The big one is, why is OOo using a Java-based XSLT processor? At the bibliographic project (of which I am the co-project lead) we have done a lot of work with XSLT, but it has been suggested to us it is a bad idea to base production code on XSLT because of the Java dependency. That seems like a rather big problem to introduce for unclear benefit (there are C-based alternatives that are equally viable). And actually, if we're going to use a Java processor, I suggest it ought to be Saxon, which is not only an excellent XSLT 1.0 processor, but also adds support for XSLT 2.0. Any possibility of revisiting this issue then? Bruce --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
