Subject: RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent survey] From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 27 Nov 1998 10:37:12 +0000 |
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
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent , Didier PH Martin | Thread | RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent , Didier PH Martin |
RE: why split? [was RE: XSL intent , Didier PH Martin | Date | RE: Stepping back, part two..., Pawson, David |
Month |