Excuse, if you get this mail twice, I didn't get it from the list
since yesterday, so I guess it had been lost somewhere.

Thanks for that many suggestions.

Just a note, why I tried this way:

- I like better being declarative than writing programs.
  Declarative is better maintainable, at least for me.
  If necessary I "perl" it out to Java or C.
- XSL pattern are sufficient for me to process the source.
- XSL spec is 24 pages only, KISS :-)
- source, destination and transformation in XML sounds uniform to me.

For me it would be sufficient to have a XML source language,
a XML destination language (my own, of course) and a (maybe XSL-like)
spec to convert from src to dest.

This would make HTML and DSSSL flow objects a just special destination.

Is there any reason that makes people concentrate on text processing?
I think there are a lot of other usefull XML applications
(and that's more interesting for me), such as

- Get objects from a database and make an XML document of it.
- Delete parts, for which the user has no privileges (XML to itself).
- assume: vendor for database A ex/im-ports in XML, vendor for
  database B in different XML.  Make them interoperate (XML to XML).


-- 
Stefan Trcek


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list