Le 15/10/2010 11:20, Invisible a écrit :

>> It would be more interesting if instead of javascript, you used xsl
>> referenced in the xhtml to produce the svg.
> 
> Uh... what would you use that for?

I do not know, but it would be more elegant to have xml processing xml
to produce xml.

For instance, you could make a picture of the actual xml tree/structure
(a.k.a the current page) to provide an overview with links to each
sub-section (floating over the page, as you scroll it...)
Now, why make that a picture rather than a simple set of lists & items,
that's a personal taste.

The global xsl transformation would be to echo the document (so the page
is displayed) and adding nodes to the navigation division on the fly
(well, if it is a picture, it's not a division anymore).

You would be immune to "allow javascript" box bad effect.
(but need a modern browser)

(so far, I only used xsl to generate xhtml with far more readable data &
style from raw xml code... and yet, the generated xhtml get some
javascript to fold & expand some parts of the displayed tree; but it
make an easy way to pretty show the dedicated xml automatically
(including multiple views of the same dataset with different angles): a
single reference to the xsl, nothing more and it's done.)

-- 
Real software engineers work from 9 to 5, because that is<br/>
the way the job is described in the formal spec.  Working<br/>
late would feel like using an undocumented external procedure.

Post a reply to this message