Re: XML + (XSL | CSS) ?

["Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@xxxxxxxx>]

Daniel Glazman wrote:
> > XSL is, even if I am enthusiastic about embedding styles
> > into a XML formalism, a complex specification and I doubt
> > that all the audience who hardly understands some difficult
> > concepts in CSS will be able to produce XSL quickly.

Lisa Pease wrote:
> Using XSL, I can put the text directly into the style
> sheet once, and have it repeat 1000 times for each
> book listing. In addition, I can select out only
> those portions which I am using for that list.

All very true, but look at the stars too much and you can tumble into a hole.
Sure, XSL is way cool, no question about it.  But XML 1.0 and CSS 2.0 are Full
Recommendations TODAY; how far off is XSL?  Judging from the Working Draft of
XSL Requirements, a good while.  So do we experiment with half-baked solutions
like IE3 did with CSS version 0.5, or do we implement using beautiful, solid
blueprints -- while *planning* for the future?  Is there any reason we can't
have BOTH options, like CSS for simple stuff, XSL for for more complex or
dynamic stuff?  We want XML + CSS, and we want it NOW!  (apologies to Jim
Morrison ...)

Who's going to do it?


/Jelks


======================
 Jelks Cabaniss
 jelks@xxxxxxxx
 http://www.jelks.nu/
======================


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list