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

Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful

Subject: Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful
From: Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 1999 11:13:51 +0100

Or one might say....

XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(my semantics)+CSS -> Presentation
XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(your semantics)+CSS -> Presentation
XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(his semantics)+CSS -> Presentation
XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(their semantics)+CSS -> Presentation

... And so on...

How does this help with accessibility, platform independence, common
understanding etc. etc.?

Persoanly I prefer...

XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(Domain Specific XML) -> Presentation

...Where Domain Specific XML migh be FOs or other objects for GUI, braille,
aural etc., etc..... this to my mind is are far more robust, easy to
support, and less open to "abuse". So we might have...

XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(gui: / fo: / aural:) -> Presentation

In order to deliver a full XML presentation.

I would suggest that you are the one advocating a mess, and formaly
specified domains for presentation are the only way to bring the Web back
from a Tower of Babel scenario to use of a lingua franca.

What I prefer is freedom to use prefered semantics for your data, as you
know best how to mark-up your data, but formaly specified semantics for
presentation as I presonaly feel that very few people know best how to
describe the presentation of their data :)


xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 04/23/99 12:11:03 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  Re: Formatting Objects considered harmful

On Fri, 23 Apr 1999, James Clark wrote:
So instead of
   XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(FOs) -> Layout
...we have:
   XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(DATA)+CSS -> Layout

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

Current Thread