Subject: Re: XQL + XSL = Better (kinda like scripting) From: Paul Prescod <papresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 11:34:00 -0600 |
Andrew Bunner wrote: > > "How hard do you want to make it for someone to write an XSL engine?" > > Your XSL engine would have to include an interpreter for a language that's > almost as complicated as C++. The complexities of Ecmascript and C++ are not even on the same order. Paul Prescod - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco The government everybody loves to abuse sues the company everybody loves to hate. Throw in a bunch of faceless lawyers cross-examining techies [with] all the charisma of a video driver and you've got a spectacle of thoroughly miniscule proportions. - Netsurfer Digest quoted in TBTF XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XQL + XSL = Better (kinda like , Paul Prescod | Thread | Re: XQL + XSL = Better (kinda like , Tyler Baker |
Re: XQL + XSL = Better (kinda like , Paul Prescod | Date | Re: XSL Examples? <?xml-stylesheet>, Mark D. Anderson |
Month |