Re: syntax feedback

Oren Ben-Kiki a écrit :

> > Yeah... So why does XSL reinvent the wheel and not reuse CSS
> > selectors' syntax ? Why those ugly xsl:then and BLA $eq$ "sdfv" ?
> > Why position qualifiers using negative integers in order to say 'last
> > one' ? Berk !!!!
> 
> Because CSS syntax is not XML. I think that the XSL syntax is reasonable
> given the XML constraint. While not as nice as a dedicated syntax (such as
> CSS), being an XML language gives it other advantages.

Agreed, but partially. Ok, XML formalism for transformations is,
originally, a very good idea. But the way matching is done in XSL
is far too different from CSS selectors and XSL
and CSS formatting models does not seen to be harmonizable, despite
of all efforts being done since the first joint meeting in
Rocquencourt in may. Why the hell is a working group of the W3C
building a spec which is not compatible with existing specs so
at least industry could reuse what has been developed with CSS ???
Why not just try to XMLize first the selecting part of CSS and reuse
it on a DSSSL basis ? I've never read a good answer to that question,
and saying only that "because CSS is not XML" is not enough. The
selecting mechanism can be easily described in XML...

</Daniel>


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