Subject: Modes (or lack thereof) From: Mark_Overton@xxxxxxxxx Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 09:20:35 -0400 |
I don't want to be negative but... Why is the "mode" capability missing from the new spec. This is one of the most important aspects of XSL. The ability to use the same XML element in different places in the output, using different style rules, is crucial. This missing functionality is the primary reason why the MSXSL processor is of limited use. Maybe I'm missing something in the spec but how would I do something like: use the chapter headings in a table of contents and also show up at the top of a chapter. In the TOC I want it as a list-item and in the chapter I want it as a heading. The only thing I see is the section "2.7.7 Direct Processing". This may allow me to do what I want but it forces me to abandon modularity of the rules. Again, I may be missing something but, why? The original proposal had a functional implementation of modes. I built an XSL processor which used them and they worked great. I don't want to seem ungratefull to the working group for thier time and effort. There are some very good things in this spec. As I built our XSL processor I found many things which the old proposal didn't address. The IDAnchor is a good example. I had to create my own version of this to allow a "jump" to an element using its ID. The attribute value templates solve another problem I had to create a work-around for. So, I can see they put alot of thought into the draft, but still, the lack of modes seems incomprehesible. What am I missing? -Mark Overton XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: New/old pattern syntax, why can, James Tauber | Thread | Re: Modes (or lack thereof), James Clark |
Re: New/old pattern syntax, why can, James Robertson | Date | RE: New/old pattern syntax, why can, James K. Tauber |
Month |