Subject: RE: Venting From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 16:41:46 +0000 |
Hi Didier. Your points are well made, and certainly worthy of consideration. The point bellow is the key I feel to the issues being presented. We are getting dangerously close to persuing marketing rather than issues of a style language, chief proponents of the split being a self confessed entreprneur, and a company with a completed transformation parser. Can I ask the DSSSL bods out there something, as I have no experience with DSSSL? As I understand it, DSSSL expresses both transformation and flow objects (equiv. formatting objects). Would DSSSL users appreciate the split of these? It is also the stated goal of the XSL WG to achieve for XML a style language at least as expressive as DSSSL and CSS... why should we have less than that for XSL? Cheers Guy. xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 02/04/99 05:55:49 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx cc: (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID) Subject: RE: Venting [SNIP] It is not a technical issue. And James replied well to the request. [SNIP] Regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com 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 -> |
---|---|---|
MS patents style sheets, Simon St.Laurent | Thread | Re: Venting, Paul Prescod |
Re: Venting, Guy_Murphy | Date | Re: Venting, Don Park |
Month |