W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2002

Re: Media types

From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@rbii.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 13:29:29 -0500
To: www-tag@w3.org, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-Id: <E16QYjC-0001Rf-00@server2000.ebizhostingsolutions.com>
On Tuesday 15 January 2002 12:33 pm, Paul Prescod wrote:
> > In this example, I'd say it's both HTML and XSLT.  However, HTML
> > has the advantage in determining how that XSLT should be
> > interpreted, since it's the container.
>
> Let's put it this way. The XSLT fully defines the meaning of the
> document. In fact, this document was cut and pasted OUT of the XSLT
> specifications. That specification claims that it is XSLT. The XHTML
> specification, on the other hand, specifically says that such a
> document is not "a strictly conforming XHTML 1.0 document".

It really doesn't matter what the specifications say.  You have to 
associate a processor (read interpreter) with the document before it 
makes sense one way or another. If I run an XHTML processor over it, 
it will try to interpret it as such. If I run an XSLT processor over 
it, it will try to interpret it as such. If I try to run a JSP 
processor over it, it will try to interpret it as such.

There is nothing in the document that would force a choice one way or 
the other. Claims that the outermost element should be the thing that 
dictates the processing are misguided IMNSHO.... as I have yet to see 
a truly universal processor capable of the infinite ways of processing 
an XML file we might come up with.
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2002 13:55:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:06 GMT