[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
RE: [xml-dev] SGML complexity
- From: "Nathan Young -X \(natyoung - Artizen at Cisco\)" <natyoung@cisco.com>
- To: <xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
- Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 10:04:48 -0700
How did this troll get so successful?
As far as I can tell there are only three substantive points:
- XML is more verbose than some other markup languages
- XSL may not be the best choice for every programming task
- XSL may or may not be a programming language
The first two points are widely accepted.
The third has been argued here in a much more intelligent and friendly
(!!) way in the past, with the fact that XSL is a declarative language
weighing off against the fact that it is Turing complete (or is it? I
seem to remember a thread spinning off with respect to this point as
well)
As far as I am aware, those high quality conversations did not end up in
a provable answer to the question "is XSL a programming language" nor
did they even conclude in a widely held consensus.
In any case, by taking two obvious statements and a permathread,
bundling them in with a bunch of inflammatory statements, personal
attacks, unsupported assertions, and a general lack of clarity, an
individual has managed to propagate a very healthy thread ("healthy" in
terms of number of messages and number of words typed by humans)
Trolls in training take note :)
------------>N
.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:||:._.:
||:.
Nathan Young
Cisco.com->Interface Development
A: ncy1717
E: natyoung@cisco.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philippe Poulard [mailto:Philippe.Poulard@sophia.inria.fr]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 2:43 AM
> To: juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com
> Cc: xml-dev@lists.xml.org
> Subject: Re: [xml-dev] SGML complexity
>
> juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com wrote:
> > Philippe Poulard said:
> >
> >>juanrgonzaleza@canonicalscience.com wrote:
> >>
> >>>That i said is that you cannot use XSLT (at least 1.0) for
> the menu in
> >>>the _final_ doc, you _may_ use JS.
> >>>
> >>>Therefore here XSLT is lacking functionality. Is not?
> >>
> >>not at all : this is not a lack of functionality of XSLT,
> it is a lack
> >>of functionality of the navigator ;
> >
> >
> > So far as i know XSLT was designed to be a -programming-
> language for
> > static transformations:
> >
> > [http://www.xml.com/pub/a/1999/05/xsl/xslconsidered_1.html?page=3].
> >
> > Therefore, you cannot change the DOM in a full dinamical
> way as i can do
> > today with a JS linked to a (X)HTML doc. XSLT is lacking
> functionality
> > already available on JS, PHP, ASP, and the next.
>
> If I had enough time to waste, I would design a navigator that would
> work as I explained before, but instead of replacing the old
> document by
> the new one produced with XSLT, it would make a 'diff' and
> replace only
> the parts that changed in the DOM
> Thus, it is possible to change the DOM : the result of calling the
> onmouseover="<xsl:call-template>" in that hypothetic silly
> implementation is the same than with javascript ; it has even
> the great
> advantage to perform changes without specifying if it is an update, a
> removal, a creation, or a mix of these low-level operations
>
> What you can do with XSLT also relies on the host system
>
> >
> > Therein that a new approach is being launched. From
> > 1.5. Relationship to XSLT on [http://www.w3.org/TR/xbl/]:
> >
> > <blockquote>
> > XSLT operates on a static DOM, permanently replacing that DOM for
> > rendering. XBL, on the other hand, transparently transforms
> the DOM for
> > rendering while leaving the underlying structure intact,
> and dynamically
> > reflects changes to the underlying DOM in the transformed rendering.
> > </blockquote>
> >
> > Probably up-down menus and other dinamical stuff in XML
> docs I can do via
> > PHP or JS -but cannot do with XSLT- will be easily done via
> future XBL. It
> > appears a promising approach, it is broadly supported by
> Mozilla and a
> > version of binding language for SVG (sXBL) is being defined.
> >
>
> recall :
>
> >
> >>most navigators can invoke
> >>javascript functions, but they can't invoke XSLT
> >>http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/scripts.html
> >>
> >>it would be possible, perhaps with something like this :
> >><META http-equiv="Content-Script-Type" content="text/xslt">
> >>...
> >><a id="topPrimaryMenu1" ... onmouseover="<xsl:call-template
> >>name='openMenu'><xsl:with-param name='doc'
> >>select='$document'/><xsl:with-param name='itsId'
> >>select='&quot;navigationZone1&quot;'/></xsl:ca
ll-template>">
> >>the template would just copy the entire entry except the
> element which
> >>ID is 'navigationZone1' that would be retemplated with the
> output style
> >>expected
> >>of course, a navigator should supply means to bind the XSLT
> namespace to
> >> xsl (by using the usual xmlns declaration) and to bind
> $document to the
> >> DOM document (just like it does for javascript with many objects)
> >>
> >>but it would be somewhat useless :
> >>-as XSLT can be already invoked from javascript
> >>-the escape sequence is somewhat ugly
> >>
>
> --
> Cordialement,
>
> ///
> (. .)
> --------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------
> | Philippe Poulard |
> -----------------------------
> http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
> Have the RefleX !
>
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]