Subject: RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Microsoft extensions) From: "Lawton, Scott" <slawton@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 15:48:17 -0500 |
> XML to HTML is a trivial problem I suspect your definition of trivial must differ from mine.... > that has > been solved with free software since before there was an XML. > If you are into easy scripting language, Python... Sure, I could roll my own but it seems safe to assume that one goal of XSL is to make XML-to-HTML (and other transformations) easier than writing the whole thing in a scripting or programming language. Having spent more than a week solid with XSL, it doesn't yet seem up to the task (at least for my XML and my desired HTML). That's fine, it's a working draft -- but I've got something to deliver now. So, I'm looking for alternatives to XSL that are a bit higher level than conventional scripting languages. OmniMark LE has been suggested (I downloaded it and will take a look); anything else? (Saxon was mentioned but that's for Java programmers.) TIA, Scott XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, James Robertson | Thread | RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, Didier PH Martin |
RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, Gavin Thomas Nicol | Date | Re: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Tyler Baker |
Month |