> -----Original Message-----
> From: Noah Slater [mailto:]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2005 7:55 AM
> To: Paul Prescod
> Cc: Steven T. Hatton;
> Subject: Re: [docbook] Whatever happened too CSS+XML?
>
> I think perhaps you are missing the point. I don't think
> anyone here is saying that CSS is the equivalent of XSLT, or
> in fact, anything similar.
>
> I think the major point is that if you want the semantic
> goodness of an advanced XML document type such as DocBook
> without any of the post processing goodness of XSLT - CSS is
> more than an adequate way of styling this information for the user.
"If you don't need XSLT's features, don't use XSLT." Fine.
But what Steven said was:
> Using XSLT to transform XML into Netscape 4.7-compatible tag soup HTML
> is -- at best -- a wasted effort.
Perhaps what he should have said is that it CAN be a wasted effort in
SOME cases. Which is also close to a truism.
So I see the whole "debate" (which has been running for around 7 years
now) as a waste of time.
Paul Prescod
