Re: <xsl-script>

[Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx]

Hi Dave.

I must admit that the capabilities you outline bellow would be exciting. To
be honest is was your referal to shades of ASP that really caught my
attention. I'm not sure whether it would be a good idea yet or not, but it
certainly sounds interesting.

Wouldn't it be best however to standardise on ECMAScript however? Otherwise
one can't be sure of the script parser on the target platform.

Cheers

     Guy





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 05/11/99 08:48:21 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  <xsl-script>




[SNIP]
I personally think <script> ought to be in XML itself - I can imagine using
it to allow a document to convey (via it's DTD for example) how a receiving
processor is supposed to manipulate it. Very object oriented. Shades of
Active Server Pages even. Conversely, imagine an XSL stylesheet who's
document is a script that knows how to go out and get the data it's
supposed to present - for example a list of stocks one is interested in.
The whole idea of "intelligent content" seems to me to be one of the bright
potentials of the X*L family of notations... if they include a means of
adding "intelligence" to a document.
No offense meant to anyone...
Dave LeBlanc

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list






 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list