Subject: Re: XSL with scripting From: Brandon Ibach <bibach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1998 16:21:38 -0600 (CST) |
Paul Prescod said: > > I believe that these paragraphs contradict each other: > I don't. Explain? As long as I'm here, I may as well also express a sentiment which I've felt many times during this thread. Somebody mentioned "layering scripting on top of XSL". I believe a better solution may be to go the other way around, and in fact, we have an example of this in xslj. DSSSL lets me do pretty much anything I could want to do in a transformation / styling language, because it is a complete programming language. (Of course, things like database access and such aren't quite possible right now, but I think we'll see these emerge as possibilities in the coming months.) If I don't want to hack up a bunch of Scheme to do what I want, I need only find a prepackaged function which accomplishes the task and integrate it into my specification (though, personally, I'd probably write it myself and reuse it later). So, why couldn't an XSL implementation work the same way? Have a scripting engine at the core, and build the declarative on top of that. Honestly, I currently see XSL as little more than a pretty face for something like DSSSL (but, then, I haven't gotten into XSL that heavily). Just my $.02... take it or leave it. :) -Brandon :) XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL with scripting, Paul Prescod | Thread | RE: XSL with scripting, Pawson, David |
[no subject], Éric Riblair | Date | Re: Want serialized (rather than DO, Henry S. Thompson |
Month |