Re: Proposal: (node ...) construction rule type

Subject: Re: Proposal: (node ...) construction rule type
From: Paul Prescod <papresco@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 15:00:23 -0400
David Megginson wrote:
>  > James has other DSSSL extensions. As long as he can accept a standard
>  > stylesheet Jade would be DSSSL compliant.
> Yes, but all of Jame's other extensions can be declared in
> DSSSL-compliant ways, using 'external-procedure',
> 'declare-characteristic', or 'declare-flow-object'.  There is no
> corresponding 'declare-construction-rule' procedure in DSSSL.  I don't
> know how much of a problem that might be for James.

I see your point about the scope of extensions.
> With Jade, at least, it's almost trivial -- SP is already providing
> all of the required information (although optimising the character
> handling would take a bit of work).  From what I've seen, anything
> based on NXP should have no problem either.

I can't see how any implementation that allows you to iterate through
nodes manually (node-list-first, node-list-rest, etc.) could have a
problem implementing with this.

 Paul Prescod

 DSSSList info and archive:

Current Thread