Good point. It would be best if we used the same name space and
function names. But I kinda like "output" as the function/element name
better than "redirect". XSLT users would find "output" easier to remember,
since it already controls various aspects of the output from
a transformation. Saxon also uses "output".
Tom
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hmmm - I'm not sure that's the real problem for the user - needs more
> thought (just got back from vacation myself).
>
> Hey - we should all talk about extension standards too. Since this is
> virtually the same external functionality as xalan's redirect, why not use
> the same namespace and function names?
>
> Although I haven't thought it through yet, why don't we just have both
> xalan and xsltc extensions use the same namespace. That way any common
> extensions will work exactly the same in both, so users don't have to
> change their stylesheets. Helps to make the difference between the two
> seamless, just like the JAXP/TrAX interfaces do. Obviously there will be
> some extensions that are custom to one or the other half, but that's OK.
>
> - Shane
>
> ---- you Tom Amiro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote ----
> Hi, I heard Gary ask if the XSLTC folks are listening. Morten just added an
> extension to XSLTC support the
> redirection of output to files. It is used like this:
> <xsl:stylesheet
> xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
> xmlns:xsltc="http://xml.apache.org/xalan/xsltc";
> xsl:version="1.0">
> <xsl:template match="/">
> <xsl:text>This goes to standard output</xsl:text>
> <xsltc:output file="blob.xml">
> <xsl:text>This ends up in the file 'blob.xml'</xsl:text>
> </xsltc:output>
> </xsl:template>
> </xsl:stylesheet>
