[gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[René Neumann]

Dear all,

I noticed, that there is a global useflag 'xsl', with one of those
bleh-descriptions "Enables XSL support"

There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.

Now there is also the local useflag xslt (used by three other packages)
for enabling xslt support (by pulling in libxslt).

My questions now are:

* Is there a real difference between them? As far as I can see XSL is a
superset of XSLT, but it's somewhat fuzzy.
* Should 'xsl' remain a global useflag?
* Should php remain 'xsl' or go to 'xslt'?
* When building a new package with optional XSLT-support: Should I use
'xsl' or 'xslt'.

Thanks,
René

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

The correct one should be xslt and that's it..

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Gilles Dartiguelongue]

Le jeudi 25 avril 2013 à 10:45 +0200, René Neumann a écrit :
> Dear all,
> 
> I noticed, that there is a global useflag 'xsl', with one of those
> bleh-descriptions "Enables XSL support"
> 
> There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.
> 
> Now there is also the local useflag xslt (used by three other packages)
> for enabling xslt support (by pulling in libxslt).
> 
> My questions now are:
> 
> * Is there a real difference between them? As far as I can see XSL is a
> superset of XSLT, but it's somewhat fuzzy.
> * Should 'xsl' remain a global useflag?
> * Should php remain 'xsl' or go to 'xslt'?
> * When building a new package with optional XSLT-support: Should I use
> 'xsl' or 'xslt'.

Maybe it should even be a specific flag and enabled with USE=xml,
depends on the package I guess.

-- 
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Ole Markus With]

On 25/04/13 10:45, René Neumann wrote:

> There is exactly one user of it: php -- to pull in libxslt.
> 
> * Should php remain 'xsl' or go to 'xslt'?

The reason for using xsl is that PHP had two xsl(t) extensions: one
called xslt and one called xsl. Before we had USE flags for both of
these to distinguish them (even tough xslt is php4-only and xsl is
php5-only).

Renaming the USE flag now should not be a big issue tho, if it is
considered important enough.

-- 
Ole Markus

Re: [gentoo-dev] Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Peter Stuge]

René Neumann wrote:
> * Is there a real difference between them? As far as I can see XSL
> is a superset of XSLT, but it's somewhat fuzzy.

XSL is the Extensible Stylesheet Language, one way to think of this
is as the file format. XSL is a subset of XML.

XSLT means XSL Transform, which is the process of applying XSL onto
an input XML document, and if input document fits the XSL then the
transform usually results in some kind of useful output. The XSL
document specifies the transform output format and uses data and
structure from the input document.

XSL could be said to somehow imply XSLT, because that is the common
case, but I can easily imagine a case where distinction would be
appropriate; an XML editor application might have an optional
feature allowing users to work in particular with XSL documents,
although the editor is not in fact able to perform a transform.
An xslt USE-flag would be a poor fit.


> * Should 'xsl' remain a global useflag?
> * Should php remain 'xsl' or go to 'xslt'?

When transform is supported I think xslt makes sense.


> * When building a new package with optional XSLT-support: Should I
>   use 'xsl' or 'xslt'.

If it can indeed do transform, I would say to use xslt.


Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> The correct one should be xslt and that's it..

Can you please motivate your opinion? Saying "that's it" is quite hostile.


//Peter

[gentoo-dev] Re: Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 357 bytes --]

On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:12:05 +0200
Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:

> Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > The correct one should be xslt and that's it..
> 
> Can you please motivate your opinion? Saying "that's it" is quite hostile.

Terse maybe.  Blunt.  Hostile?  No.

BTW, use xslt.

:)

-- 
gcc-porting
toolchain, wxwidgets
@ gentoo.org

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Useflags: xsl vs xslt

[Rich Freeman]

On Sun, Apr 28, 2013 at 11:33 PM, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Apr 2013 17:12:05 +0200
> Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:
>
>> Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> > The correct one should be xslt and that's it..
>>
>> Can you please motivate your opinion? Saying "that's it" is quite hostile.
>
> Terse maybe.  Blunt.  Hostile?  No.

Maybe not hostile, but it certainly is blunt, and it basically has an
implied "because I said so."

Nobody learns from a blunt answer.  Potentially people learn from one
that has a one-sentence rationale, even if it is just "for the reasons
already stated."  However, that is better accomplished by just ++'ing
the previous post.

Rich