This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Cascading. ( Re: Recursive Template Application )
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Cascading. ( Re: Recursive Template Application )
- From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul at qub dot com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2000 20:00:04 -0700
- Organization: The Qub Group
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006192124280.18513-100000@ted.sergeant.org>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
----- Original Message -----
From: Matt Sergeant
> > > Actually there is a standard way, but its outside the realm of XSLT and
> > > inside the realm of XML. Its called "cascading" and is detailed in the
> > > HTML 4.0 spec, and referenced explicitly in
> > > http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-stylesheet
I'm sorry, I failed to find the word 'cascading' in the URL you are providing.
(funny that, eh?)
> > > The only processor I'm aware of that directly supports this model is AxKit
> > > (funny that, eh?), although I'm certain there must be others. I've written
> > > a sort of high-level overview of how this works on the axkit web
> > > site: http://axkit.org/docs/associating_stylesheets.xml
I think it is good for AxKit that AxKit supports cascading. I actualy think
that AxKit project is very consistent with perl culture and the way it supports
w3c standards is very natural for perl.
> > ... or you may just invoke Ux in command line mode, instead of invoking
> > XT itself.
> >
> > ux "transformation_1.xsl | transformation_2.xsl | transformation_n.xsl "
>
> That is not the same thing - this does not use the w3c ratified technique
> for cascading styling - like most other XSLT stylers, this uses a custom
> non-ratified, non-standard technique for cascading.
It is good you have a standard technique to support some typical
usecases, like:
"cat some.xml | aggregate.xsl | expand_widgets.xsl | render2pdf.xsl | render.class "
and
"cat some.xml | aggregate.xsl | expand_widgets.xsl | render2html.xsl "
Mind to share how to do that with AxKit powered by appropriate w3c
standard technique for cascading ?
> Ux sounds nice, but its not what I was talking about ;-)
Those who need standards, may try AxKit, those who need
chaining XSLT transformations in ... I think - convinient ... way -
may use Ux.
AxKit and w3c cascading ( yet undefined ) is nice, I just think that because
the problem domain addressed by AxKit ( and w3c ) is actualy self-limited -
there is no criminal to explain that there is some solution ( called Ux )
which:
1. Avoids hardcoding of data/processing binding into the document
( this makes Ux different from w3c and saxon )
2. Avoids usage of xt:nodeset() non-standard extension.
I'm sorry if it was not appropriate to place this view on chaining
in reply to your letter ( because I now realize that your leter was
actualy talking about the standards which are good for us, right ? )
Rgds.Paul.
PS.
Poor me, who is now using document( "!/ ls | sort | verbose") in almost
every XSLT stylesheet .... It is not standard....
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list