Comments on https://so.nwalsh.com/2026/03/31-xslt10https://so.nwalsh.com/comments/2026/03/31-xslt102026-04-06T15:19:55.275ZComment 0002 on /2026/03/31-xslt10https://so.nwalsh.com/2026/03/31-xslt10#comment00022026-04-06T16:19:55.296+01:002026-04-06T16:19:55.296+01:00Norm Walshhttps://norm.tovey-walsh.com/

I'm inclined to take issue with some of your characterizations, I'm not sure why you think the Saxon HE release is only "sort of" open and I think the current C, C++, C#, Python, and PHP bindings are all solid.

But I am sympathetic to your position. I wish there were more open implementations of later versions of the standards. Here's hoping some of the current energy leads to fruition.

Unfortunately, no one is interested in continuing to maintain the 1.0 stylesheets, and I think it's only fair to make that clear to potential users.

Comment 0001 on /2026/03/31-xslt10https://so.nwalsh.com/2026/03/31-xslt10#comment00012026-03-31T21:49:27.304+01:002026-03-31T21:49:27.304+01:00Elliotte Rusty Haroldhttps://elharo.com

The problem is not the specs, it's the software. There's one sort-of-open XSLT > 1 implementation for Java which has some impressively hacky bindings for C and Python. Looks like there's also some independent work happening in Rust now. But for most purposes, XSLT after 1.0 is a one-vendor product.