Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:13:51 +0100 |
Or one might say.... XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(my semantics)+CSS -> Presentation XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(your semantics)+CSS -> Presentation XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(his semantics)+CSS -> Presentation XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(their semantics)+CSS -> Presentation ... And so on... How does this help with accessibility, platform independence, common understanding etc. etc.? Persoanly I prefer... XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(Domain Specific XML) -> Presentation ...Where Domain Specific XML migh be FOs or other objects for GUI, braille, aural etc., etc..... this to my mind is are far more robust, easy to support, and less open to "abuse". So we might have... XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(gui: / fo: / aural:) -> Presentation In order to deliver a full XML presentation. I would suggest that you are the one advocating a mess, and formaly specified domains for presentation are the only way to bring the Web back from a Tower of Babel scenario to use of a lingua franca. What I prefer is freedom to use prefered semantics for your data, as you know best how to mark-up your data, but formaly specified semantics for presentation as I presonaly feel that very few people know best how to describe the presentation of their data :) Cheers Guy. xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 04/23/99 12:11:03 PM To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx cc: (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID) Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, James Clark wrote: [SNIP] So instead of XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(FOs) -> Layout ...we have: XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(DATA)+CSS -> Layout [SNIP] XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Guy_Murphy | Thread | Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Guy_Murphy |
Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Guy_Murphy | Date | Re: HTML is a formatting/UI languag, Guy_Murphy |
Month |