Subject: Re: Microsoft XSL and Conformance From: "Nikolai Grigoriev" <grig@xxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2000 01:03:49 +0300 |
Jonathan Marsh wrote: > Andy and I, along > with other members of the MSXML team have had a lot of conversations > about being more open to the XML community and putting a human face > on our development activities. Andrew's post is a great example of > our moves in this direction. I agree. You have noticed the positive effect of Andy's message; let's hope this will become a common practice. Prior to your message, I was absolutely sure that Microsoft people decided to ignore XSL-list. Even announcements about new versions of MSXML (both January and March) were posted here by persons external to Microsoft; why not by Andy or you? > Also, this issue has shown that a void of accurate information can quickly > become a forum for "MS bashing" and that the best way we can avoid this is > to provide accurate and timely information to the community. I presume many people here have some experience in writing universally acceptable JavaScript ;-). By having a non-conformant XSL(T) in the Internet Explorer, we risk to recreate the same situation in the stylesheet domain. IE XSL influences the practice of routine XSL writing - just because it is installed in a number of copies zillion times greater than XT or Saxon. No wonder the reaction to yet another delay in proper XSLT support has been so nervous: a ghost of XSL'98/JScript'2000 is still wandering around. Best regards, Nikolai Grigoriev RenderX XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Microsoft XSL and Conformance, Didier PH Martin | Thread | RE: Microsoft XSL and Conformance, Kay Michael |
Re: possible to mimic while-like be, Mike Brown | Date | RE: possible to mimic while-like be, Carole E. Mah |
Month |