[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: XSL Debate, Leventhal responds to Stephen Deach

• From: "Jonathan Borden" <jborden@m...>
• To: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>, "'XML Developers' List'" <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 20:23:33 -0400

Simon St.Laurent wrote:

>
> Remember, not everyone has Microsoft's resources, and implementing a spec
> you flat out disagree with isn't a pleasant task.

	Yes but there are several source code available XSL implementations which
could be reused.

>
> I'm afraid that there _is_ widespread dissatisfaction with XSL in general.
> The XSL-List discussions and the XML.com discussions have made that clear.
> It's very hard to say negative things on XSL-list about the XSL project,
> unless you enjoy getting beaten up.  I'm impressed that we detractors have
> held out as well as we have, and for so long.
>
> I may just be a lightning rod for people who don't like XSL, but I've had
> at least 10 Java developers say they thought XSLT was a horrible mess,
> along with about 15 Web developers.

	Mess? why? Aside from the fact that declarative 'programming' can be a
paradigm shift for those used to procedural programming. But that old
argument aside, isn't there room for both styles? We have ECMAScript, Java,
Python, PERL etc as common languages. Why not add XSLT? Diversity in
languages is a Good Thing. I have used most major computer languages over
the past 2 decades and support XSLT as a unique and useful addition to this
family.

> >The "war" however has been declared on XSLT.
>
> The 'war' has been declared on both fronts, though it sounds like the FO
> folks are at least trying to use CSS vocabulary at this point.
> (See recent
> postings on XSL-List.)
>

	And the XSLT folks? What would you have them do? Do you believe:

1) transformations are not important
2) procedural languages (e.g. ECMAScript+DOM) can handle transformations
just fine.
3) DSSSL can be modified to better handle transformations
4) XSLT is just not a good way to transform (and if so please suggest
another)

	What is your position here?

Jonathan Borden
http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net


xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
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@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: XSL Debate, Leventhal responds to Stephen Deach
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: XSL Debate, Leventhal responds to Stephen Deach
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: SAX2: Namespaces and syntax of compound names
• Next by Date: RE: Two more SAX2 (0601) Parsers
• Previous by thread: Re: XSL Debate, Leventhal responds to Stephen Deach
• Next by thread: RE: XSL Debate, Leventhal responds to Stephen Deach
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread