Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> Hi.
> 
> Yes I would rather see 100 XTL languages rather than see XSL sullied.

Sullied is a pretty vague word. Most of us in favor of separating out the
transformation language believe that the XSL style language would be
stronger after that change.

> If you want to discuss the future of XTL, please go form an XTL mailing
> list.

The XSL transformation langauge is currently a part of the XSL
specification. This is the most appropriate place to discuss it unless
that changes.

I would venture that far and away most of the people in this fora are
using the transformation language without the formatting objects. Would
you really like all of them to "go away?"

-- 
 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

"Remember, Ginger Rogers did everything that Fred Astaire did,
but she did it backwards and in high heels."
                                               --Faith Whittlesey


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