Subject: RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Microsoft extensions) From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 10:25:21 -0500 |
Thanks a lot Paul, as usual, right on the target. By the way, thanks for your DSSSL tutorial it helped me a lot to understand this language. Cheers Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Paul Prescod > Sent: Thursday, November 12, 1998 12:32 AM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Microsoft extensions) > > > Didier PH Martin wrote: > > > > Hi Paul > > > > you said: > > I don't think of Omnimark as high-level. I think of it as ultra > low-level. > > It is focused on the nuts and bolts of the text. > > > > Can you briefly describe what you mean by "low level and focused on the > > text". Is it lower level than XSL and if yes why. We can learn from your > > explanations. > > Omnimark is about string processing. It is very good at matching strings > that are SGML tags and so forth, but the basic model is the same as > working through an RTF string or a comma delimited file string. When I > work with XML, I want to think of it as just a serialization for a *tree*. > It's the tree that I want to work with in my code. Omnimark is low-level > in that it works with the string and not the abstraction it represents. > Python+PyDOM or Python+PyGrove, on the other hand, is about working with > the tree, which is what you are probably interested in. > > http://www.python.org/topics/xml/ > > Of course, you can also use Python+PySAX, which is somewhere in between > Omnimark and PyGrove, but even there you have a rich toolbox of data types > and functions. Omnimark's types and functions are not as rich. > > Paul Prescod - http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco > > At today's pop doubling rates, in 100 years there will be 20 billion > people, more than enough to fill the earth. In 300 years, we will have > filled up 16 earth-sized planets (roughly, our solar system). In 2300 > years we will have filled up 200 billion earth-sized planets (roughly, > our galaxy). Only one technology can save us: birth control. > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, Didier PH Martin | Thread | RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, Lawton, Scott |
RE: Microsoft extensions to XSL (w, Didier PH Martin | Date | RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Mi, Didier PH Martin |
Month |