From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Norman Walsh To: David Mason Cc: docbook-tools-discuss@sourceware.cygnus.com Subject: Re: was something else - now SGML and XML Date: Wed, 27 Dec 2000 06:36:00 -0000 Message-id: <9238-Wed23Feb2000120259-0500-ndw@nwalsh.com> References: <951281049.19725.ezmlm@sourceware.cygnus.com> <200002231643.LAA22211@devserv.devel.redhat.com> X-SW-Source: 2000/msg00082.html / David Mason was heard to say: | > If you're referring to IE5 support for XSL, it's so badly broken | > that it's just about useless. (Worse than useless, in fact.) | | Is that true - I, obviously, don't use IE but I see a lot of traffic on | the DocBook lists from people who do and despite the fact that they Which lists? | are usually trying to work around some problem - there sure seems to | be a lot of people using it. Is that true or am I trapped in a good | marketing scheme? It doesn't support , or variables, or named templates, or a half a dozen other things. I've toyed with XSL stylesheets for sdocbook, but you can't even number footnotes or sections fer cryin' out loud. I'm sure there are lots of people trying to use it, and they've got my sympathy. If you're doing server-side stuff with tabular XML data extracted from some database and your injecting it into HTML coded in some other tool, it probably does some job fairly well. But that's not a job I have to do, thank goodness! Be seeing you, norm -- Norman Walsh | Curiosity never killed anything http://nwalsh.com/ | except maybe a few hours.