Subject: RE: HTML is a formatting/UI language was: RE: Formatting Objects considered harmful From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 25 Apr 1999 10:51:25 -0400 |
> > > Transmitting XHTML probably does not make sense when we could > instead get > > the client to do the transformation. I think we can all agree on that. > > Yes. But how will you make existing browsers perform transformations? > This comment gives me the sense that your real argument is that: "Client side XSL itself is harmful" rather than just "XFO is harmful". This logic is dangerous for innovation. The XSL spec is not even finished yet we are already seeing (IMHO) fantastic innovation. By this logic, there is no need for the Opera browser because there are 100 million existing Netscape and IE browsers in use. IMHO, browser developers can compete on the best and strictest adherence to XSL and other W3C and IETF standards on the widest range of platforms. To answer your question: One way to retrofit existing browsers is via MIME filters. Didier Martin, for example, has discussed the use of a MIME filter in IE and Mozilla to render SGML and XML via DSSSL. The filter intercepts the MIME request, transforms the document and passes this along. Another technique is via client side Javascript & Java transformation etc. etc. etc. The concept supported by both IE and Mozilla is that there is an API which allows client side application development. Let me turn this question around: What facilities does Opera have to allow client side XSL transformations, and what facilities are planned? Jonathan Borden http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: HTML is a formatting/UI languag, Håkon Wium Lie | Thread | RE: HTML is a formatting/UI languag, Håkon Wium Lie |
Re: About XSLT, Sharon Adler | Date | Re: xlxp-dev: XSL and editing tools, Paul Prescod |
Month |