RE: [transquery-discuss] Transquery use of Saxon, extensions

From: Leigh Dodds (ldodds@ingenta.com)
Date: Tue Dec 04 2001 - 12:03:13 CET

• Next message: Leigh Dodds: "[transquery-discuss] Input Parameter"
• Previous message: Leigh Dodds: "RE: [transquery-discuss] Welcome"
• In reply to: Bryan Rasmussen: "[transquery-discuss] Transquery use of Saxon, extensions"
• Next in thread: Dan Diebolt: "[transquery-discuss] Aggregate Functions and Closure"
• Reply: Dan Diebolt: "[transquery-discuss] Aggregate Functions and Closure"
• Reply: cutlass: "Re: [transquery-discuss] Transquery use of Saxon, extensions"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

> ...I suppose that if extensions are used in Transquery implementations
they
> should be exslt, although for the proof of concept that the demo site is I
think
> it's fine using Saxon. Any opinions there?

I agree. Transquery should not be tied to a particular processor, so using
the exslt extension functions is a Good Thing.

Cheers,

L.

--
Leigh Dodds, Research Group, Ingenta | "Pluralitas non est ponenda
http://weblogs.userland.com/eclectic |    sine necessitate"
http://www.xml.com/pub/xmldeviant    |     -- William of Ockham

• Next message: Leigh Dodds: "[transquery-discuss] Input Parameter"
• Previous message: Leigh Dodds: "RE: [transquery-discuss] Welcome"
• In reply to: Bryan Rasmussen: "[transquery-discuss] Transquery use of Saxon, extensions"
• Next in thread: Dan Diebolt: "[transquery-discuss] Aggregate Functions and Closure"
• Reply: Dan Diebolt: "[transquery-discuss] Aggregate Functions and Closure"
• Reply: cutlass: "Re: [transquery-discuss] Transquery use of Saxon, extensions"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 22 2002 - 11:35:58 CET