W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > January to March 1999

XSL acronym ambiguity

From: Robin Cover <robin@isogen.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1999 11:03:39 -0600 (CST)
To: xsl-editors@w3.org
cc: robin@isogen.com
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.3.96.990106104841.6747D-100000@grind>
James and Steve,

I forwarded such a note to some XSL WG members a few
months ago, and cannot now determine whether the following
matter is something that:

a) has slipped through the cracks
b) the XSL WG elects not to resolve, preferring ambiguity
c) the XSL WG wants to resolve but can't, for lack of consensus
d  is to be resolved by some entity other than the XSL WG
e) explained otherwise (...)

Namely, we still don't know whether "XSL" is determinative
for any particular phrase, or for several.

To wit:

As of 1999-01-06,

has "Extensible Stylesheet Language"


has "Extensible Style Language (XSL)"


has "Extensible Style Sheets Language (XSL)"
as well as "XSL - the Extensible Style Language"


Sorry to pester you with such a minor point.

My own feeling (OK, you didn't ask!) is that the "XSL"
effort under the name "style" covers too much ground,
since "style" would have to do with rendition, while
many other kinds of processing semantics ("behaviors")
including queries and links don't feel to me like they
are a matter of "style" in any fundamental/obvious sense.

Any chance that this will get solved soon?

Thanks to each of you for the extraordinary (difficult,
time-consuming) effort you have given to bring XSL to

Best wishes for 1999.

Robin Cover
Received on Wednesday, 6 January 1999 12:03:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:44:16 UTC