[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

Re: Language choice (was: Re: Interactive XML)

---

---

Chris makes some good points. I wonder where this thread is going though.
It seems that _some_ kind of default notation is a must, if for no other reason
than to make XSL engines easy to produce. It also seems that requiring more
than one language is burdensome primarilly for the same reason.

But aren't host environments going to provide access to host-defined objects
and methods, such that they can be accessed from within an XSL style sheet?
If so, how do host-defined objects differ significantly from, say, Java
objects? Or an objects available from a plug-in?

Use of such objects might constitute a departure from a standard use model for
the style sheet, resulting in (as mentioned) the inability of a "conformant" engine
to process an otherwise conformant style sheet.

Now, it seems from experience with SGML that dependancies on externally
defined notations and entities is unavoidable in the general case. Where it needs
to, SGML recognizes these dependancies explicitly through entity and notation
declarations. Under an XSL scenario, one might use some similar declaration
to suggest that the engine pull in additional objects/methods from elsewhere.
The other option is to just let host objects automagically appear in the XSL
 environment, which someone will eventually do in order to get what they
need.

MHO.

- Mitch


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

---