Weighing in on XSL / Standards

[Buss, Jason A]

Actually, If anyone has been following the discussions over the last month
or so on the DSSSL mailing list, it is interesting to see that a number of
people are wanting to begin updating the source for Jade.  Mr. Clark has
been very busy with XSL, and those who want more from Jade are taking it
upon themselves to add features to Jade.  I don't know if this has been
blessed by James.  But there are a lot of people who have a lot of faith in
DSSSL and (I for one) hate to see it become "the standard that isn't".
There are a number of posters who have built their own modules and scripts
into Jade to meet whatever needs they had for it, and they have placed the
source on a server to be checked out through WinCVS.  This thread was pretty
heated at times, and for as long and detailed as the postings were, it's
obvious that there are quite a few people who support DSSSL and were
disappointed by the lack of implementation by commercial software vendors.
It is going to be interesting to see where this goes, not only for those who
use SGML, but for XML as well.  XSL can't handle both (although I am sure,
as has been argued here, that it could with a fair amount of wrangling).
But for my occupational needs, I use FOSI.  I really want to use DSSSL.
Anyone here who would be interested in helping with this project would be
more than welcome, I'm sure.  

Many DSSSL posters feel kind of kicked to the curb, after all the work that
was done to standardize DSSSL, only to have everyone flock to XML and it's
related standards.  The selling point of SGML was to ensure portability and
longevity of legacy data.  But it isn't a programming language.  You can't
create your own apps with it.  SGML is pretty much useless without the apps
to process it, or any way to present it.  

It's kinda like what our parents told us about cereal:  "Don't open a new
box until you finish the last box!!!".....

"And stop hitting your sister!!!"

DSSSL isn't even an old standard by comparison.  Still fresh and crispy.
*sigh*    

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Tim Bray [SMTP:tbray at textuality.com]
> At 10:20 PM 5/24/99 +1000, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> >Dave has mentioned that DSSSL was only partly implemented, but it should
> >be emphasized that this does not mean a failure in the DSSSL
> >specification:
> 
> I couldn't disagree more.  A standard which goes unimplemented is not
> only a failed standard but actively damaging, as it weakens the arguments
> for standards-based development.  -Tim
> 
> 

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)