Re: XSL with scripting

Paul Prescod said:
> 
> I believe that these paragraphs contradict each other:
> 
   I don't.  Explain?

   As long as I'm here, I may as well also express a sentiment which
I've felt many times during this thread.  Somebody mentioned "layering
scripting on top of XSL".  I believe a better solution may be to go
the other way around, and in fact, we have an example of this in xslj.
   DSSSL lets me do pretty much anything I could want to do in a
transformation / styling language, because it is a complete
programming language.  (Of course, things like database access and
such aren't quite possible right now, but I think we'll see these
emerge as possibilities in the coming months.)  If I don't want to
hack up a bunch of Scheme to do what I want, I need only find a
prepackaged function which accomplishes the task and integrate it into
my specification (though, personally, I'd probably write it myself and
reuse it later).
   So, why couldn't an XSL implementation work the same way?  Have a
scripting engine at the core, and build the declarative on top of
that.  Honestly, I currently see XSL as little more than a pretty face
for something like DSSSL (but, then, I haven't gotten into XSL that
heavily).
   Just my $.02... take it or leave it. :)

-Brandon :)


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