[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
RE: CSS and XSL
Subject: RE: CSS and XSL From: "Jelks Cabaniss" <jelks@xxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 13:19:40 -0500 |
Oren Ben-Kiki wrote: > >In fact, wouldn't > >the "whole-world-is-XML" approach be more favored by monolithic program > >aficionados (you only have to use *one* parser for *everything*) than the > >Unix "separate pieces" approach. > > Using one _syntax_ does not mean using one specific parser - and definitely > doesn't mean using one monolithic program. Quite the opposite. Hmm. I thought the big argument for XSL, etc. expressed in XML was to parse everything with the same parser. Are you saying The One Syntax is for the benefit of *humans*? > >And though I'm not necessarily opposed-on-all-counts to expressing style > >in XML, I really haven't yet seen an XML approach that doesn't butcher > >the beauty and simplistic elegance of CSS. > > Mine included, I suppose. Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder... True... So is simplicity. :) /Jelks XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
CSS and XSL, Oren Ben-Kiki | Thread | Fw: CSS and XSL, Oren Ben-Kiki |
RE: CSS/XML in IE5b2 - generated co, Jelks Cabaniss | Date | RE: [none] (Wendy's question), Mike Dierken |
Month |