RE: CSS, XSL & "Religious Schisms" (RE: syntax feedback)

Subject: RE: CSS, XSL & "Religious Schisms" (RE: syntax feedback)
From: "Markor, John (Non-HP)" <jmarkor@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 08:44:11 -0800
I tend to agree - I love CSS - and since XSL is still a pipe dream for many
software developers (A good example is Microsoft's interpretation of XSL
versus the W3C's interpretation - they are miles apart).

The nice thing about CSS is it allows XML to coexist with HTML.  If you use
Tidy.exe (found on the W3C web site) to convert HTML files, the end result
is a file that can be read with an HTML browser, and parsed with an XML
parser.  While not perfect (there may be a need to add other elements to the
document to fit your specific application needs), it is a step in the right
direction.  For example, as a trial, I took a 30 chapter book, and converted
it to parseable XML, with a CSS attached to the document, in a total of 10
minutes, using the DTDs located on the W3C web site.  

The resulting XML file was over 10,000 lines long - if I had to do this
manually, it would have taken an enormous amount of time.  If I had to use
an XSL style sheet, it would have been even longer, because there are NO!
decent XSL editors out there that I know of which support the W3C
specification.

Maybe in the future, someone will come up with a program that converts CSS
to XSL - for now, I'll take the CSS.

-----Original Message-----
From: Laurie Mann [mailto:laurie.mann@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, December 14, 1998 7:06 AM
To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject: CSS, XSL & "Religious Schisms" (RE: syntax feedback)


> From:	Sebastian Rahtz [SMTP:s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
	>what has always amazed me, as an observer, is who the great
defenders
	>of CSS are. it is quite recent, it has never been fully
implemented,
	>and it is agree by all parties to be a nasty hack. its a sort
of orc,
	>so far as one see. So why, when XML and XSL come along, is it
not
	>allowed to die an honourable death? where are these millions of
users?
	>when did you last see a web page using CSS?

	I'm a fan of CSS.  No, it's not perfect but it's pretty easy to
use
	and does at least 75% of what I need it to do without undo
agony.
	And, yes, I do use it on many (though not on all) pages that
	I've created.

	I think the current debate over CSS/DSSSL/XSL goes back to
completely
	forgetting that you have a huge range of people using the Web
and online
	HTML-based doc.  You have early-adopters who are always going to
	want the latest and greatest of whatever is available, whether
	it's a standard or not.  But you have
	many other folks who struggle to remember to put <p> between
	every paragraph. <blink> is still a big deal to about 10% of the
	folks out there on the Web.  And one of the useful things about 
	browsers is supposed to be their forgiving natures.

	CSS is a lovely tool for those of us who are in the middle.  We
find HTML's
	limitations on format frustrating and we don't have the
technical resources
	to build pages dynamically.  CSS lets you tag things any way you
want
	and then, when you want to make formatting changes, you only
need to make
	them in one place.  That for many of us is what makes CSS so
handy.

	Many folks are on the sidelines about XSL.  I'm sure I'll need
to learn it
	eventually, particularly once I delve more deeply into XML.  But
there's
	no reason why both CSS and XSL can't both be maintained.  They
don't
	appear to be in conflict.  




 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