• From: Michael Kay <mike@s...>
• To: Marcus Reichardt <u123724@g...>
• Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 12:02:28 +0100

Lots of people have invented non-XML syntaxes for XSLT; they have all died a quiet death without achieving any signfiicant adoption.

I think there are a number of reasons:

(a) the use of XML syntax is off-putting to beginners but no problem at all to experienced users

(b) using a preprocessor makes development a lot more complicated - diagnostics are less helpful, and helpful diagnostics are much more important to developers than pretty syntax.

Michael Kay
Saxonica

> On 30 May 2022, at 08:45, Marcus Reichardt <u123724@g...> wrote:
> 
> Begging (raising) the question why XSLT does have to be in XML syntax,
> and why nobody has bothered to invent an alternative non-XML syntax.
> AFAICS, the only rationale of XSLT being XML itself can be that XML
> literals can be used with ease. 

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: Norman Gray <norman.gray@g...>

• References:
  • The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: Roger L Costello <costello@m...>
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liam@f...>
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: Dimitre Novatchev <dnovatchev@g...>
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: "Liam R. E. Quin" <liam@f...>
  • Re: The limits of XML mean the limits of my data world
    • From: Marcus Reichardt <u123724@g...>