Subject: Re: XSL is difficult to...? From: "Don Park" <donpark@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 1999 15:54:22 -0700 |
> Oisin McGuinness wrote: > > > > Both the issues raised by Don Park concerning naming of > > xsl:apply-templates etc., and "james-the-other-one"'s 'apply-tempaltes' > > problem could presumably be addressed by an XSL processor which > > understood SGML Architectures; then they just have to define their XSL > > rule names as inheriting appropriately from the "official" ones. > > While this idea certainly may lend itself as a solution to Don's > concerns, I personally view this as being a threat to the adoption of > XSL by the masses. If everyone goes forward and starts making their own > proprietary language tags, we will fragment XSL into a completely > un-unified (spelling?) and therefore undesireable language for the > Internet. I don't know where I might have given the wrong impression but I raised those issues for the benefit of the XML community in general and not because of some specific problem I am trying to solve. I do agree with Duane that encouraging different dialects of XSL will be harmful to wide adoption of XSL as a standard. Best, Don XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: XSL is difficult to...?, Duane Nickull | Thread | Re: XSL is difficult to...?, Paul Prescod |
Re: Formatting Objects considered h, Jonathan Borden | Date | Re: How do you this XML document to, Matt MacKenzie |
Month |