Just saw that you asked for specific examples. One specific example
relates to grouping. In 1.0, grouping was extremely frustrating. Steve
Muench came up with a tedious way to make it possible in 1.0, later
called the Muenchian Method. In 2.0 you've got the problem taken care
of by xsl:for-each-group, which iterates across a series of groups
with the grouping criteria specified by its attributes. UNC wanted to
implement something that would required complicated node grouping, and
that was the reason I originally had to use 2.0. We were wary of using
2.0 but they wanted to go ahead since they weren't transforming on the
fly. I think it's kind of a risky thing to do for your EAD to HTML
stylesheet in general though.

2.0 is handy if you want to output multiple result documents as well.

Joyce

On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 3:13 PM, Christian Dupont <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
> I’d be curious to know how many institutions are currently using XSLT 2.0
> for writing their EAD transform stylesheets, or are thinking about moving to
> the 2.0 standard.
>
>
>
> If you have made the move or are contemplating it, what do you see as the
> chief reasons or benefits for doing so? Are there specific types of
> transformations that you find easier or previously impossible under the 1.0
> standard?
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
>
> Christian
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________
>
> Christian Dupont
>
> Aeon Program Director
>
> Atlas Systems - a company promoting library excellence through efficiency
>
> phone: 757-467-7872 x215     fax: 757-467-7875     mobile: 434-242-6096
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> http://www.atlas-sys.com/
>
>
>
> Registration for the  2010 ILLiad International Conference: Exploring Trends
> in Resource Sharing is now open.  Pre-Conference is March 24 and the
> Conference runs March 25 and 26.  The conference is open to everyone with an
> interest in Resource Sharing.  Learn more at
> https://www.atlas-sys.com/conference/
>
>
>
> Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is intended only
> for the named recipient(s) above and may contain confidential information.
> If you have received this message in error, or are not the named
> recipient(s), please immediately notify the sender and delete this e-mail
> message from your computer without making any copies or distributing it to
> any other person.  Thank you.
>
>
>
>



--
Joyce Chapman
NCSU Libraries
Metadata and Cataloging/
Digital Library Initiatives
[log in to unmask]