Re: none

[Norman Walsh <ndw@xxxxxxxxxx>]

/ John McClure <hypergrove@xxxxxxxxxxx> was heard to say:
| Microsoft is one of those that implements XSL as (just!) a transformation 
| language, with the apparent idea that the formatting objects in HTML are 
| quite adequate for the time being. "For the time being", I agree with this 
| approach also, and would like to see the specs track to that, renaming XSL 
| into something more descriptive of its current transformation function.

<vent>
The XSL spec contains both a transformation language (one
designed specifically for transformations required for
presentation) and a vocabulary of formatting objects.  How does
the decision of an implementor to implement only part of a
specification change the "current function" of a specification!?
</vent>

Not that I'll be the slightest bit surprised if we wind up
producing two specs.

                                        Cheers,
                                          norm
-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@xxxxxxxxxx>      | Imagine if every Thursday your
http://nwalsh.com/                 | shoes exploded if you tied them
                                   | the usual way. This happens to us
                                   | all the time with computers, and
                                   | nobody thinks of
                                   | complaining.--Jeff Raskin


 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist