[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@qub.com>
- To: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
- Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2000 14:22:43 -0800
From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@home.com>
> Are you and Matt really thinking about mixed content (text
> and elements) or are you thinking about ***unknown***
> combinations - that is, there is a lot of flexibility about
> what can come next?
I agree with you also. ( too bad you've captured this flaw,
because it requires me to say something I hate to say. )
You are right. The *real* problem for pull processing is
'messy content' ( the entity which is missing in any
XML document I've seen. I wish I'm wrong and
there is some W3C paper which talks about
'messy content' ? I appreciate the URL ).
Mixed content is only a part of bigger usecase -
'messy content'. This was concluded on SML-dev list
like ... one year ago...
Unfortunately, making the next step requires
discussing other issues that are not related to
declarative/procedural in XSLT.
We are better not to open this can.
( Just to explain - for example, *some* cases of
'messy content' are better to be processed with
saxon:evaluate == mutable stylesheets. ).
Because this has nothing to do with Matt's point about
declarative / procedural part of XSLT, I thought that
I'm better to stay in the borders defined by W3C.
I mean :
'Mixed content' is legitimate entity.
Matt's sentence regarding 'mixed content' is correct.
In the real life people rarely use messy content
without mixed content ( it is possible, but .. ) -
so let's simplify things a bit and agree with Matt,
because what he is saying is very reasonable.
Discussing 'messy content' is not safe thing.
Thanks for understanding.
Rgds.Paul.
PS. BTW - my other point remains valid. The problem
domain of XSLT is to render documents : 'messy content'.
Mostly 'mixed content'.
Other usecases may require another balancing of
declarative / procedural.
|