[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: Splitting XSL
Subject: Re: Splitting XSL From: "Don Park" <donpark@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 6 Feb 1999 04:51:05 -0800 |
Paul, The proposal looks great. >Due to the current organization of XSL there are many "XSL >implementations" that have nothing to do with formatting. Currently there >is nothing the W3C can do to discourage these "half-implementations" >without also discouraging the use of the transformation language as a >basis for electronic commerce and data interchange. Not only has the W3C >not discouraged these half implementations, one of them is by an editor >of the XSL specification and others are by W3C members! I think the last sentence rubs rather too harshly. >The signatories to this document do not herein propose any change to >the specification-making process. Opinions vary widely on the best way >to create technical specifications. We do all agree that it is the user >community's right to complain when technology creators do not meet their >needs. We invoke that right in the issue of the XSL language. Sounds good. We promise not to touch the car radio if they let us ride along <g>. I think we have more rights than just rights of the user community. W3C is/was partly funded/sponsored/hosted by governments via MIT, DARPA, INRIA, etc. Best, Don Park Docuverse XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: Splitting XSL, Didier PH Martin | Thread | Re: Splitting XSL, Richard Lander |
Re: Fw: A weaker XSL?, Paul Prescod | Date | Re: Splitting XSL, Rick Ross |
Month |
Keywords