Re: Chameleon components

On 2/7/07, Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@sun.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> | Then, it will look like <p:xslt, will have similar look as <p:for-each
> | or <p:choose which is a bit annoying.
>
> Yeah, but I can't decide if that's a bug or a feature.



Feature in my book because "p:xslt" ...

<p:xslt .../>

is easier to understand than:

<p:step type="p:xslt" .../>

but that is from asking people who use smallx where the former is
the way things are done.  So they have a bias.


| Furthermore, for authoring tool, it won't be so easy to move from a
> | component call to another, especially from a core one (p:xslt) to a
> | user defined one (p:step name="my:xslt") and vice versa.
>
> The tool will have to know about the extension components, that's
> true.



Right.  And this is a solvable problem.  In fact, any XSLT authoring
tool has had to deal with this for extension elements.


-- 
--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