W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org > July 2007

Re: Serialization

From: Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 12:14:23 -0700
Message-ID: <4828ceec0707171214h1d9a04f1x3b28986749811c15@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>

On 7/7/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote:
> It was added because people felt that the author of the stylesheet needed
> to have full control as stylesheets are distributed to users who treat
> them as black boxes.   Certainly, the use case of a browser invoking
> a transformation is one of those "black boxes".
>
> I feel strongly that:
>
>    * this is a very important feature for deployment encapsultation
>    * the implementation cost is low as it just passes a set of
>      "options" to a serializer
>    * the complexity cost is low because an author just optionally
>       sets serialization options
>    * this is something which your average XSLT author is familiar
>    * this is something that XSLT 2 spent a lot of time to get right because
>       there was a real need in the XSLT user community.  As such, we'll
>       have that need too.

Fair enough: I don't necessarily agree with all the points you are
making, but I don't feel very strongly about this. So if the consensus
is that we need this feature, I won't oppose it :).

Alex
-- 
Orbeon Forms - Web 2.0 Forms, open-source, for the Enterprise
http://www.orbeon.com/
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 19:14:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:21:53 GMT