RE: Standard API to XSL processors

	Didn't someone have a .sig floating around for a while that said
something such as "data cannot be used at a granularity finer than its
markup"? I'm going to take a wild guess that the data structure not well
captured by the DOM is the pattern match attribute content that was
previously exposed as element structure. The WG giveth (significant
structure hidden in attributes), and the WG taketh away (the utility of the
DOM to manage the stylesheet tree).
Cheers,
David vun Kannon

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Tyler Baker [SMTP:tyler@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent:	Tuesday, January 12, 1999 5:58 AM
> To:	xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject:	Re: Standard API to XSL processors
> 
> Oren Ben-Kiki wrote:
> 
> > Could James - and anyone else who has been writing XSL processors or
> other
> > random-access XML applications - share their experience with using the
> DOM
> > as internal representation?
> 
> The DOM minus namespace support does a great job for the source tree as is
> but
> is not so great for the stylesheet tree which needs to be parsed into a
> more
> granular set of data structures.
> 
> Tyler
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


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