Talk:Document Style Semantics and Specification Language: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 09:27, 24 April 2011

Computing Stub‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

CSS vs. DSSSL

Shouldn't the article reveal that for all practical intents and purposes, DSSSL was displaced by CSS in the late 1990s?-- era (Talk | History) 10:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not really; they were never players in the same space. DSSSL, like XSL, transforms semantically structured documents into layout specifications; CSS decorates a structure with formatting properties. CSS caught on much more widely due to its simplicity and the fact that its target audience was the Web rather than large-scale publishers, but I don’t think it’s accurate to say that DSSSL was displaced by CSS. — crism (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Any discussion of CSS really needs to refer to Haakon Lie's PhD thesis. This explains many of the design decisions behind CSS, particularly those that are seen by CSS newcomers as "limitations" in CSS. CSS was intended to be the styling language in widespread use, not just one of many. In particular he's quite clear that DSSSL was looked at before designing CSS, considered as a possible basis for the web stylesheet language, and then rejected for over-complexity. Thank goodness for that. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 Shouldn't the article reveal that for all practical intents and purposes, DSSSL was displaced by CSS in the late 1990s?--&nbsp;[[User:Eeera|era]]&nbsp;<small>([[User_talk:Eeera|Talk]]&nbsp;|&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/Eeera|History]])</small> 10:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 :Not really; they were never players in the same space.  DSSSL, like XSL, transforms semantically structured documents into layout specifications; CSS decorates a structure with formatting properties.  CSS caught on much more widely due to its simplicity and the fact that its target audience was the Web rather than large-scale publishers, but I don’t think it’s accurate to say that DSSSL was displaced by CSS. <span style="font-family:serif;">— [[User:Crism|<span style="color:#0000cc;font-style:italic;">crism</span>]] <span style="font-size:80%;">([[User talk:Crism|<span style="color:#009900;">talk</span>]])</span></span> 21:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
+:: Any discussion of CSS really needs to refer to Haakon Lie's PhD thesis. This explains many of the design decisions behind CSS, particularly those that are seen by CSS newcomers as "limitations" in CSS. CSS was intended to be ''the'' styling language in widespread use, not just one of many. In particular he's quite clear that DSSSL was looked at before designing CSS, considered as a possible basis for the web stylesheet language, and then rejected for over-complexity. Thank goodness for that. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|talk]]) 09:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)