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

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

---

---

Kai Grossjohann said:
> 
> >>>>> Brandon Ibach <bibach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
>   >    Hey, I like Scheme, but I'll also admit that my eyes hurt if I look
>   > at it for too long.  It's not the friendliest language out there.
>   > But, it's damn well suited to the task.  So, people want an HTML-ish
>   > looking style language?  Standardize a mapping of HTML-ish syntax to
>   > standard DSSSL!
> 
> But that's (almost) what xslj does!  (xslj requires some minor
> modifications to DSSSL, IIRC, but possibly these will be rolled into
> the standard.)
> xslj translates an XSL stylesheet to an equivalent DSSSL `program'.
> Including the EcmaScript stuff...
> 
   Exactly! :)  What xslj did was take the *syntax* defined by the XSL
proposal and create a frontend for it that linked it to DSSSL.  I
think that's great.  If people don't like the looks of DSSSL, but
think XSL is easy, then as long as XSL's basic model is compatible
with DSSSL's, why not let them type it in in XSL and convert it?
   So, given how well this seems to work, why isn't the XSL WG just
defining an alternate syntax for DSSSL?  Why are they reinventing the
functionality that DSSSL already provides?  (If I'm misinterpreting
what the WG is doing, please let me know...)
   And if there are things missing from DSSSL (such as cascading),
they can come up with reasonable extensions and modifications that
could be proposed as a Technical Corrigendum (sp?) to DSSSL.

-Brandon :)


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

---