RE: CSS and XSL?

Subject: RE: CSS and XSL?
From: "Steven Livingstone, ITS, SENM" <steven.livingstone@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 14:17:27 +0100
To follow this up, can I ask which may be a naiive question, but scripting
languages are very much used in association with CSS (and others..) on
browsers to provide many features, such as validation, dynamic changing of
content etc....

Can (or will) XSL approach this level, or shall you still use the
traditional scripting languages with XSL ??. 
For example, how would be provide form validation with XSL?? I don't know if
it would be worth XSL having this functionality without, say, Javascript
which already does it anyway.

Sorry if I am missing something...


Join Association of Internet Professionals -

Steven Livingstone
President, AIP Scotland.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Wilson, James.W [SMTP:James.W.Wilson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:	11 June 1999 12:42
> To:	'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
> Subject:	RE: CSS and XSL?
> speaking only for myself, not for my employer -
> For publishers, XSL might mean that the different processes for rendering
> into print, CD, and online content could be *merged* in large part (or
> even
> in smaller part; this would also be a very big win). Jade pointed the way
> towards this model, with various output formats coming from a single DSSSL
> stylesheet, but DSSSL is not something I would drop on designers and
> internal standards people. XSL *is*, and hopefully will become even more
> accessible with future iterations. (Hopefully James Clark et al are noting
> the number of people on this list confused by match patterns vs.
> expressions
> vs. ...) I don't think CSS+Javascript can be as accessible, primarily
> because of Javascript (CSS is wonderful for its specific purpose).
> For those who think that XSL is too focused on publishers' needs,
> consider:
> if it's very easy for publishers to repurpose their data in a *useful* way
> on the Web (as opposed to crufting up some high-maintainance online-only
> path which produces marginally useful HTML), the floodgates will open and
> the amount of high-quality content on the Web will balloon.
> James
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chuck Robey [mailto:chuckr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 1999 6:12 PM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: CSS and XSL?
> On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Steven Livingstone, ITS, SENM wrote:
> > I have read it -
> > 
> > my *opinion* is that CSS really only needs to be used to work with HTML,
> > where XSL is limited/not supported.
> > 
> > I personnaly would always use XML with XSL and send CSS to the client if
> > this wasn't supported - XSL, to me, is MUCH more powerful than CSS. At
> the
> > same time all of XSL isn't fully implemented, fully supported or even a
> > complete standard, so there are no doubt things you can do with CSS in
> > browsers (for example..) which you cannot yet reliebly do with XSL ..
> > 
> > Am I wrong ??
> I asked another question about xsl's uses, and had not one answer that
> would indicate the xsl wasn't needed.  Mine was from a publishing point
> of view.
> I'm beginning to think that those that wish xsl to go away are narrowly
> concerned with their own application, and do not care that xml has more
> than one application.
> I think you're right.  I also think that most arguments against xsl
> aren't well considered.
> ----------------------------+---------------------------------------------
> --
> Chuck Robey                 | Interests include any kind of voice or data 
> chuckr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx       | communications topic, C programming, and
> Unix.
> 213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1  |
> Greenbelt, MD 20770         | I run picnic and jaunt, both
> FreeBSD-current.
> (301) 220-2114              | 
> ----------------------------+---------------------------------------------
> --
>  XSL-List info and archive:
>  XSL-List info and archive:

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread