- From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org>
- Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:25:25 -0700
- To: public-xml-processing-model-wg <public-xml-processing-model-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <28d56ece0704131925m7a5e4e53r874acdf2193433b1@mail.gmail.com>
On 4/13/07, Alessandro Vernet <avernet@orbeon.com> wrote: > > > On 4/13/07, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.org> wrote: > > I have a strong preference for "transform"... but I'm not going arm > > wrestle you for it. :) Anyone else? > > I would go with "stylesheet". > > I can't find a strong argument for or against "transform" or > "stylesheet" in the XSLT specification: the root element can be either > xsl:stylesheet or xsl:transform and the XSLT specification starts with > "A transformation in the XSLT language is expressed in the form of a > stylesheet". So it seems to be a wash. > > My preference for "stylesheet" comes from my perception that most > people are calling that "XSLT document" a "stylesheet" rather than a > "transform" or "transformation"; so "stylesheet" just seems more > natural. <rant> That's such an abuse of terms... but that's my personal opinion. XML to XML is a transformation XML to "eye candy" is a stylesheet :) </rant> ...but I concede that 'stylesheet' is the more common term. *sigh* -- --Alex Milowski "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language considered." Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Saturday, 14 April 2007 02:25:31 UTC