Subject: Re: XSL with scripting From: "Oren Ben-Kiki" <oren@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1998 19:15:38 +0200 |
Paul Prescod <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >The transformation/formatting issue was mostly about of politics and >timing -- not a technological design issue. I do believe that this issue does have technical implications - even deep ones - in addition to the politics and timing implications. For example, the ability to generate non-XML output. If the transformation part were separate, it would be possible to raise issues of this sort. As it stands today, they are clearly out of the scope. >I strongly doubt that the W3C >is going to put much faith in a vote on a deeply technical design issue >from people who are not privy to the discussions that led to the current >design. A vote indicates the strength of the need for a feature. Technical discussions should be drived by the needs of the intended user community... The problem with scripting is that it is hard to add it without spoiling things for a different set of users. That's what makes design such an interesting occupation :-) Share & Enjoy, Oren Ben-Kiki XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL with scripting, James Clark | Thread | RE: XSL with scripting, Ed Nixon |
Re: XSL with scripting, Paul Prescod | Date | Re: XSL with scripting, Simon St.Laurent |
Month |