I think this might be the point at which we could sit back and take a look 
(again?) at the requirements document. I say this because I assume the 
requirements are agreed to (more or less) by the consortium's membership and, 
consequently, form the scope and intent of the specification. I hope the 
process has enough integrity that the requirements are a valid discussion 
locus. It seems to me that a lot of what is going back and forth here might 
either disappear or be improved in quality and relevance if we communicated in 
terms of the requirements. Here is the link; there is a section specific to 
scripting:

	http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-XSLReq

rgrds.			...edN

-----Original Message-----
From:	Flow Simulation [SMTP:info@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:	Wednesday, November 11, 1998 7:18 AM
To:	'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'
Subject:	Re: Microsoft extensions to  XSL

Tyler Baker wrote:
> I think the worst thing is to try and use XSL for something that it was not
> suitable for.  XSL is not the end-all solution to everything.

I'm not so sure!

To be the end-all solution to many things it needs an "escape to scripting 
language"
as was originally proposed.   If you don't have it I think you get another 4GL 
development
tool which drops you off a cliff-edge when you are 95 percent there.

Script seems to me to be a sensible and practical compromise to "get you home", 
e.g.
to compute a total.    If your stylesheet contains a very large
amount of script then perhaps XSL isn't the ideal language.

I hope script gets back into the spec. and I'm glad Microsoft kept it in IE5. 
  If that
dilutes the declarative purity of the language, it is a price I am willing to 
pay.

On the subject of Microsoft:

Tyler Baker wrote:
>It would be nice if there was a public statement by Microsoft that they will 
not
>work to own the XSL spec as so many people seem to fear.

Microsoft have contributed to the XSL draft and have stated that they will 
track the spec. with
IE5's XML and XSL support.   I don't really see what else they can do. 
  Personally I think
XSL and XML are more of a threat to Microsoft than the other way around.

Bill Ayers (BillA@xxxxxxxxxx)




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


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