[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Wed, 2004-12-08 at 19:10 -0500, Vladimir Gapeyev wrote:
> So, according to the previous posts, there are valid reasons for having
> XML-based XSLT syntax, and for having a more humane variant.
>
> Question: why can't this be the case, so that we enjoy the benefits of
> both? I.e. why can't we have two isomorphic syntaxes for XSLT, both
> blessed by a standards body --- similar to the two syntaxes for RelaxNG.
Intriguing idea Vladimir.
Would anyone like to guess how the ideas of relax-ng might map onto
XSLT?
regards DaveP
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT + Docbook FAQ
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
|
