Re: [docstandards-interop-discuss] A concern. Semantic mismatch and how to address it.

["Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

On 11/04/07, David RR Webber (XML) <david@drrw.info> wrote:
> Dave,
>
> Your approach below is TO BE AVOIDED AT ALL COSTS!  Ocean boiling alert!!

No need to shout.
I've never heard of such a saying btw. 'Ocean boiling'.


>
> We know this fails to provide agile exchanges - and entails DOUBLE TRANSFORMATIONS - in and out.

Sorry David, that doesn't make sense when compared to doing
n combinations? n * 2 transforms for an n based system is less.




>
> You should look at OASIS CAM work for how we are approaching this for transactional XML.

Why please? How does that help here?



>
> And CAM syntax reuses XPath and xslt so it does not invent much of anything itself.  It also allows implementers to add their own custom extensions for local needs.

If I'm dealing with XML I don't know of anything better than XSLT for
transformations.


>
> I like what Michael was saying yesterday - DITA + xhtml + extensions to handle obvious document items that xhtml missing (things like ToC markup) should be enough for a very workable V1.0

So how would this vocubulary be used? (or could you point to Michaels mail
in the archives please, I don't recall it)

regards


-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk