Subject: RE: alternatives to XSL (was RE: Microsoft extensions)
From: "Lawton, Scott" <slawton@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 19:23:23 -0500
|
> In what sense is using Python's built-in, carefully designed
> XML toolkit "rolling your own"?
> I don't think of Omnimark as high-level. I think of it as
> ultra low-level.
OK, now we're getting somewhere. Slipping in a reply to another message,
I'm quite familiar with some of the web pages (e.g.
http://www.oasis-open.org/cover/ & http://www.finetuning.com/) that provide
lists of (mostly SGML) transformation tools. But they don't cover things
like "Python's XML toolkit is much higher level than OmniMark"; I would have
expected the opposite. I've been watching Python from afar for quite
awhile; maybe it's time to download it. (I suspect that would be easier for
me than DSSSL.)
...
In case the list moderator is suspicious: Maybe I should have called this
thread "short-term alternatives to XSL". I'm a big supporter of XSL -- I
just need something more powerful than the current working draft. Still, I
can take this thread off list if that's preferred.
Any more thoughts on the "highest level" alternative to XSL?
Scott
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|
Lawton, Scott - Wed, 11 Nov 1998 19:23:23 -0500 <=
jae - Thu, 12 Nov 1998 10:26:05 -0800
|
|