• From: "Andrew Welch" <andrew.j.welch@g...>
• To: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>
• Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 16:01:37 +0100

2008/5/19 Costello, Roger L. <costello@m...>:
> The niche that XSLT occupies is the "T" part - transforming XML
> documents (i.e. tearing an XML document apart, rearranging its parts,
> merging parts, and some processing of the data).
>
> Shouldn't it really be called XLT (XML Language for Transformations)?

It's historical, a bit like calling them "stylesheets".

A shame really as the name carries connotations of a lightweight
trivial language when obviously it's so much more than that.
Sometimes I hear people call them "xsl scripts" which annoys me too.

I think we've tried and failed to move away from the name
"stylesheets" in the past but sadly  it might be too late now...
perhaps if we all use xsl:transform instead of xsl:stylesheet and only
ever say "transforms" for xslt (leaving "stylesheets" for css and
"scripts" for javascript) it will get better.


-- 
Andrew Welch
http://andrewjwelch.com
Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/

• References:
  • Why is there an "S" in XSLT?
    • From: "Costello, Roger L." <costello@m...>