Subject: Re: [docbook] Whatever happened too CSS+XML?
On Tuesday 08 November 2005 12:37 pm, Dave Pawson wrote: > So why are you slagging off docbook then? I'm not. If I see problems I express what I see. Trust me, the things I /don't/ like do not get the attention I am giving DocBook. > > It is specifically intended as a means of > > rendering it. I don't believe there are very many CSS functions which > > can be achieved by XSLT without the assistance of something similar to > > CSS. The current practice of transforming DocBook into HTML is merely > > hiding the fact that it's relying on what amounts to CSS for the final > > rendering. > > False. As you will. http://lxr.mozilla.org/seamonkey/source/layout/style/nsComputedDOMStyle.h http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Gecko_DOM_Reference http://www.mozilla.org/projects/inspector/ http://www.mozilla.org/docs/dom/technote/tn-dom-table/ > > Web browsers are ideal tools for processing XML. > > XSLT implementations are far better IMHO. http://developer.mozilla.org/en/docs/Transforming_XML_with_XSLT#XSLT.2FXPath_reference > > There are roles for XSLT. Many of its capabilities are probably, as yet, > > unimagined. But many of the current applications I've seen seem to be > > workarounds to address the lack to good tools supporting the existing W3C > > recommendations for CSS and XML. > > More ... misapprehensions. > > > Quite surprisingly, one of the most capable > > challengers to XSLT that I am aware of is Mathematica. > > Pardon? http://documents.wolfram.com/mathematica/Add-onsLinks/\ XMLCapabilities/TransformingXML/ComparingXSLTAndMathematica.html Steven