Subject: XSL and HTML From: Paul Prescod <paul@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1999 12:34:20 -0600 |
Guy claims that if XML does not directly support HTML developers will "do their own thing" and that will hurt XSL and the W3C. The only problem with that theory is that "doing their own thing" is exactly what the W3C would recommend you do for server-side translations. They don't claim to be in the server-application building standards business and XSL is not intended to be a replacement for ASP. If Microsoft makes a proprietary tool for doing XML->HTML translations, more power to them! The W3C is in the business of promoting on-the-wire interoperability, not in the business of competing with software vendors. Comparisons to the frames issue is not relevant. Frames are distributed on the wire. ASP is not. On the wire, translating to HTML+JavaScript makes no sense. Sure, we need interactivity, but generating Javascript code is not an intelligent way to do it. Since the W3C's mandate is to build a robust information system for the future, I expect that they will continue to keep their priorities clear. -- Paul Prescod - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco "I want to give beauty pageants the respectability they deserve." - Brooke Ross, Miss Canada International XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Feature Request: OtherNodeExpr:, Lawton, Scott | Thread | Re: XSL and HTML, Oren Ben-Kiki |
Feature Request: OtherNodeExpr: Sel, G. Ken Holman | Date | Temporary change in xsl-list-owner, XSL-List Owner |
Month |