RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]

[Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx]

Hi.

I think the field got muddied over the term "proxy"... acting as a proxy
with a smal "p" not a network Proxy Server... sorry if I confused anybody
:)

The reason why a proxy is desirable (or an ActiveX component, it's the
fnctionality not the tech that's important) is because I produce largely
dHTML sites, and it's highly desirable to be able to "squirt" the results
of server mark-up into a chosen element. The MS Remote Scripting proxy
makes it possible to execute a JScript function on a server, and recieve
the result syncronously or asyncronously through the proxy as if it where a
local function return. ie...

myDiv.innerHTML = myRSFunction();

Now the proxy is Java so it's possible to utilise RS on any browser
supporting JavaScript and Java.... It would be nice to have an XSL parser
moulded in a similar fashion. At the moment with have this functionality in
IE5, but I see no reason why it could become common to impliment this on a
wide range of browsers.

Cheers
     Guy





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 11/26/98 10:55:09 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]




Hi,
So let me try to understand your point. Why do you need a proxy and not a
server based interpreter?
A) is it because your server deserve several sub nets and you want to off
load the server by having a proxy server on each net?
b) your main target is Modzilla and actually there is no mechanisms
(already
completed) to add a XSL processor to the browser and therefore your
solution
is to add a proxy to the browser?
c) you want to cache and pre-translate XML documents into, let's say, HTML?
Your answer could help us understand your pre-requisites
cheers
Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netfolder.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, November 26, 1998 11:19 AM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]
>
>
> Hi.
>
> Sufficient for what purpose? Your purpose?... not mine :)
>
> I want a proxy, or at least the scriptable object currently available.
> Direct browsing is one mechanism, but not always ideal.
>
> Cheers
>      Guy.
>
>
>
>
> xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 11/26/98 04:11:37 PM
>
> To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
> Subject:  RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey]
>
>
>
>
> [SNIP]
> Thus, there is no need to implement a XSL, DSSSL or xxxxL processor as a
> proxy, just a browser's MIME filter is sufficient.
> [SNIP]
>
>
>
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
>

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






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