Ian Hickson wrote:
> 
>    XML(DATA) -> XSL -> XML(DATA)+CSS -> Layout

This makes the accessibility problem worse, not better. Unless the CSS is
specifically designed to be processed by a non-graphical medium (unlikely)
then all that a non-graphical renderer has to work on is the XML element
types. Since those cannot be known in advance, the end-user must construct
a new stylesheet for every document type -- that's a high price to pay for
reading a single document!

HTML has the virtue that it has a set of "formatting objects" that we know
can be rendered both graphically and non-graphically. We also know HOW to
render them non-graphically *in advance*. An arbitrary XML document type
does not have that virtue. 

Formatting objects are not as bad as arbitrary XML -- at least they are
known in advance. But as Hakon pointed out, they are probably not as good
as HTML -- they aren't designed for multiple media display.

-- 
 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

"The Excursion [Sport Utility Vehicle] is so large that it will come
equipped with adjustable pedals to fit smaller drivers and sensor 
devices that warn the driver when he or she is about to back into a
Toyota or some other object." -- Dallas Morning News


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