Hi Michael,
I'm from Germany, where XSLT at least currently is slightly more popular
than COBOL.
http://www.google.com/trends?q=COBOL%2C
+XSLT&ctab=0&geo=de&geor=all&date=all&sort=0
I guess you're right about XSLT 2.0 being at bit underdetermined though.
Cheers,
Peter
Am Montag, den 13.12.2010, 11:04 +0000 schrieb Michael Meeks:
Hi Peter,
On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 17:20 +0100, Peter Jentsch wrote:
I'll have a look at libxslt and try to add support for libxslt to
XSLTFilter.cxx. I the long run I guess it'll be desirable to let XSLT
filter components tell XSLTFilter wether they want saxon9 / XSLT2.0 or
not using an additional attribute in USERDATA.
It'd be great to have your experience there, so we can work out what to
do about XSLT2.0 (which supposedly is a frankenstein of a language
anyway). Incidentally, XSLT is (still) trending below COBOL:
http://www.google.com/trends?q=COBOL%2C+XSLT
It'd be great to work closely with Gioele - since you will share the
requirement of not using the existing Java code to flatten the ODF to a
single XML file.
Thanks for looking into this though !
HTH,
Michael.
Context
Privacy Policy |
Impressum (Legal Info) |
Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License.
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (
MPLv2).
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our
trademark policy.