[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: gtn@ebt.com (Gavin Nicol)
- To: jjc@jclark.com
- Date: Fri, 7 Mar 1997 08:49:23 -0500
>>>So if we are going to use a catalog entry (and I'm not yet convinced
>>>this is the best solution) I would suggest having a simple DSSSL entry
>>>which looks like:
>>>
>>>DSSSL spec.dsl
>>
>>The problem with this is that it is application specific. How do I
>>tell a browser that DSSSL === DSSSL Stylesheet?
>
>I don't see your point at all. Why do you need to tell the browser? The
>browser knows that the DSSSL keyword in the catalog designates a DSSSL
>specification (it could include transformation specs as well as stylesheets)
>the same way it knows that the SGMLDECL entry designates an SGML
>specification, and the same way it would know that a type of
>dsssl-specification in a SEMANTICS entry
My point is that you are proposing adding an extension that is not
standardised or generalised. Given that we all agree that a DSSSL
keyword should be supported, there isn't much of a problem, though
I would prefer adding some descriptive label to it.
SEMANTICS is a more general solution: you could use it for
CSS or whatever else you wanted/supported.
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to majordomo@ic.ac.uk the following message;
unsubscribe xml-dev
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (rzepa@ic.ac.uk)
|