W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > October to December 1999

XSLT and XSL

From: Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 1999 17:04:45 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991021170445.00934490@localhost>
To: "John Boyer" <jboyer@uwi.com>
Cc: "IETF/W3C XML-DSig WG" <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
At 12:51 99/10/21 -0700, John Boyer wrote:
Reagle wrote:
 >3. I don't think we should have an XSL and XSLT. One or the other, though
 >the spec is confusing about it.
 >
 ><John>
 >I got the impression that XSL could give you the final HTML that a person
 >would look at.  I also could not tell on a single 14 hour Saturday which
 >part of this could not be done by the XSLT, but that's at least partly
 >because the combined spec length is over 350 pages.  I thought it best for
 >now to allow a full stylesheet to be put in and let it modify the data to
 >the point where it represents what the user actually sees.  Again, this was
 >in keeping with the motto "What you see is what you sign" which I think was
 >reiterated in that email from Don.
 ></John>
 >
 >1. XSLT is a subset of XSL that specifies the transformation methods, XSL
 >also includes the formatting object syntax.
 >2. XSL is merely one sort of XSLT used for formatting.
 >
 >I opted for #2.
 >
 ><John>It is not clear what #2 means.  In the spec, you seem to have chosen
 >XSLT. Depending on how I read 1 and 2, you either did or did not choose
XSL.
 >Is there some newer draft we don't have?
 ></John>
 
By that I mean we have a XSLT blob. One particular type of XSLT is to
transform a source document into a target document with XSL formatting. 

_________________________________________________________
Joseph Reagle Jr.   
Policy Analyst           mailto:reagle@w3.org
XML-Signature Co-Chair   http://w3.org/People/Reagle/
Received on Thursday, 21 October 1999 17:04:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:08 GMT