Subject: Re: CSS + behavior vs. XSL (was: EcmaScript, gone?) From: Chris Lilley <chris@xxxxxx> Date: Sat, 05 Sep 1998 19:17:48 +0200 |
Paul Prescod wrote: > > Daniel Glazman wrote: > > We have implementable solutions > > *now* on a very low-cost base and I wonder why we should invest 4 years > > of standardization for quite the same result... > > As you and I both said: you can probably already do almost everything that > you will be able to do in three years, but today you use gobs of scripting > code and the DOM and in three years you will use more simple, robust, > declarative languages like XSL. Actually, at the moment Daniel uses a simple and declarative language called STTS which is I think his point (ie you are both arguing for a declarative approach) but I will let Daniel describe further. -- Chris XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: CSS + behavior vs. XSL (was: E, Andy Dent | Thread | Re: CSS + behavior vs. XSL (was: E, Daniel Glazman |
Re: XSL WD1.0: Numbering in the sou, Chris Lilley | Date | Processing meta deta (or why XSL 1., Andrew Bunner |
Month |