[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re:Standard API to XSL processors
>James has claimed that the DOM is not suitable to be the internal >representation for one random access application - the XSL processor itself. I'm not sure I want to ask "why not". I do want to remind folks that if the DOM doesn't provide something that XSL needs, and you expect that other XML applications may also need it, you should liaise with the DOM WG to explore solutions and alternatives. If you've got a divergence of basic assumptions about the conceptual structure of XML that this doesn't resolve, get the Infoset or Syntax WG's involved and fold their conclusions back into both DOM _and_ XSL. The DOM is not unchangable. It can be extended. It can even be corrected, if you can demonstrate that something it now does is a serious problem. And I think the DOM developers see XSL as a useful testcase; if anything, there's a wish that XSL had been further along and in a better position to provide active feedback as the DOM evolved. If W3C comes out with a set of XML standards that don't fit together -- not necessarily perfectly, but without undue force-fitting -- someone didn't do their job. ______________________________________ Joe Kesselman / IBM Research Unless stated otherwise, all opinions are solely those of the author. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|