RE: Interactive XML

Subject: RE: Interactive XML
From: "Pawson, David" <DPawson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:51:29 +0100
Mitch wrote:
> Could you elaborate on your criticism of ECMAScript? 
> IMHO, ECMAScript is a good scripting language, at least as good 
> as some of the commercial offerings I've had the pleasure (or displeasure)
> to work with (including a number of relational application environments). 
> I'm currently using a fairly plain subset of JavaScript, with Netscapisms,
> to achieve some very useful results. Admittedly, the user interface
> features 
> are somewhat limited by the existing set of HTML based form elements, but 
> this has little to do with the language. 
DP: Our need is to access each element content and apply contractions prior
formatting and layout with XSL. This is to permit words to be replaced by 
abbreviated ASCII representations for braille.
DSSSL does this very nicely thank you, using scheme.
Present implementations rely on an efficient table driven system, with heavy
use of regexp type operations.
I am totally unconvinced that ecmascript will ever do this, either
efficently or
otherwise. For this reason I am looking for this group to suggest an 
improvement to give us equal access.

regards, DaveP

> While it is true that ECMAScript syntax alone does not provide 
> facilities such as network communication and event triggers, these 
> types of facilties are typically part of the host interface and a 
> characteristic of the type of applications being developed. That the 
> form and function of such facilities would need to be debated and 
> agreed upon for an open standard, is obvious. That ECMAScript is 
> a poor choice because it does not itself specify or standardize these 
> facilities, is not obvious. 
> Pawson, David wrote: 
> > Picking up on one point in this thread, 
> are you guys happy having ecmascript as the available tool 
> for basic processing? 

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread