RE: Venting

Hi Didier.

Your points are well made, and certainly worthy of consideration.

The point bellow is the key I feel to the issues being presented. We are
getting dangerously close to persuing marketing rather than issues of a
style language, chief proponents of the split being a self confessed
entreprneur, and a company with a completed transformation parser.

Can I ask the DSSSL bods out there something, as I have no experience with
DSSSL?

As I understand it, DSSSL expresses both transformation and flow objects
(equiv. formatting objects). Would DSSSL users appreciate the split of
these?

It is also the stated goal of the XSL WG to achieve for XML a style
language at least as expressive as DSSSL and CSS... why should we have less
than that for XSL?

Cheers
     Guy.





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 02/04/99 05:55:49 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  RE: Venting




[SNIP]
It is not a technical issue. And James replied well to the request.
[SNIP]
Regards
Didier PH Martin
mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.netfolder.com

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






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