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
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!
Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!
Download The World's Best XML IDE!
Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!
Subscribe in XML format