Subject: RE: The XSL-List Digest V1 #169 From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@xxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1998 18:33:19 -0400 |
> Paul Prescod wrote: > > > > Strange assumption, indeed. The CSS and XSL formatting models are > > currently under harmonization and it seems quite impossible to > > harmonize two things if there is a too big difference between them. > > I don't know how I could have stated this any more clearly, but: if CSS's > model was sufficient, they would have just used CSS's model and there > would have been no two things to harmonize, right? I didn't claim that > CSS's formatting model was miles away from XSL's. I merely said that it > *was not sufficient* (in the eyes of the people who decided not to use > it). Presumably because in the Holy Trinity of XML, XLL, ???, CSS didn't begin with an "X". Also, there's a bandwagon passing by and you have to be wearing pointy-brackets to get on. I do wonder what Postscript is going to look like with pointy-brackets ... I don't know how the Style and Activity pages could state it more clearly: there's no "CSS's model", just the W3C Formatting Model -- for XSL *and* CSS, the latter of which will work with both XML *and* HTML documents (and with a much simpler syntax, IMHO). Though CSS currently does not yet really do transformations of elements, attributes, and content, see http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-stts2.html.en for a taste of what's apparently on the way... /Jelks XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Attribute value templates?, keshlam | Thread | RE: The XSL-List Digest V1 #169, Simon St.Laurent |
Attribute Value Templates?, Tyler Baker | Date | RE: The XSL-List Digest V1 #169, Simon St.Laurent |
Month |