[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 04:36 AM 1/10/02, David wrote:
> I'd rather write "... where d-o-e can't work". > Your formulation somehow suggests that the processor in Mozilla is > incomplete or defective, On the other hand, client-side XSLT was not supposed to use HTML as its display language ... it just kind of happened didn't it? IE takes the easy approach for a web browser: to do a client-side transform, serialize, then re-parse the HTML into its own DOM. While understandable, this is far from realizing the full promise of client-side XML. We have yet to see anything like FO in the browser. Would be nice, wouldn't it? But we're all so used to HTML's display semantics that we don't even notice anymore the way HTML lays us out on Procrustes' bed. (Admittedly CSS is a big help these days.) (Anyone whose classical education was defective can see http://www.mythweb.com/teachers/why/basics/procrustes.html :-) Mind you it's hard to criticise IE too much for this at present since transforming linearising and re-parsing in IE is usually orders of magnitute faster than just transforming in mozilla, but hopefully that'll change, the mozilla/transformiix xslt implementation seems to be rapidly getting better at the moment. As for the speed of the transform, IE gets it at the price of platform dependency, doesn't it? Cheers, Wendell
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|

Cart



