Subject: Re: XSL & XLL From: Paul Grosso <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:05:41 -0500 |
At 11:55 1998 03 11 -0500, Paul Grosso wrote: >At 11:12 1998 03 11 -0500, Rob McDougall wrote: >>Recently, when I was examining the XSL spec and the XLL spec, it >>occurred to me that the purpose of XLL is very similar to the purpose of >>patterns in XSL. Both are used for identifying one or more target >>elements in the destination document. They share a lot of common >>functionality for locating the target elements. Why then, are the two >>syntaxes so different? . . . > >There is quite a bit of overlap in people on the XML and XSL WGs. > >The key reasons for differences between XPointer (the part of XLL >that defines addressing) syntax and XSL pattern syntax are the >user requirements, not heritage. And user requirements for XPointer >and XSL patterns do differ. . . . > >XSL is not an exercise in trying to cram all the cool stuff we can think >of into one standard. On the contrary, we are trying to learn from XML >(and the wide-spread-within-W3C reaction to the XML PR which was that it >was still too complex) and keep as much as possible out of the standard >while still addressing a reasonable set of user requirements and design >goals. Speaking for myself, I will argue to keep XSL patterns relatively >simple. Greater "selective power" may be allowed on the right hand side >(the "action"), but even there we may not match XPointer capabilities 100%. In case it's not clear, I am not speaking for the XML or XSL WG or anybody else in my posting. Rob's posting raised a question I'd heard raised by others, and it is a reasonable question to raise. I'm merely stating my current personal opinion (which may change as I evaluate further input). paul XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL & XLL, Paul Grosso | Thread | msxsl question, Gregory Beary |
Re: XSL & XLL, Paul Grosso | Date | msxsl question, Gregory Beary |
Month |