Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: Debug Support in XSL (WAS RE: XML Extensibility / XML Schemas )
 Thanks Ken. Yes. I concur. The chasm between the typically fixed structures common to WYSIWYG, essentially, property editors, and the array of semi-programmatic constructs required to work with declarative-quasi-procedural languages is large. And knowing your background, I am aware just how hard you and your former company worked to bridge that chasm. Even for DTDs which are relatively simple compared to the bewildering constructs of the XML family of specs, it was a tough nut to crack. So yes, without access to the language format, it is hard to do serious work. OTOH, I don't think for experienced practicioners this is in question. Think of how many generations of rapid development tools have come and gone, how many SGML editors, etc., and in the end, we are still using PFE or see the native language editors in the RAD tools. Caveat vendor. My intuition is that until we get the fully featured design suites promised from the large XML vendors, we will have a piece meal debug environment. I have recently sat in with several to-the-metal programmers who are trying to apply XSL, XSLT, and reasonably simple XML: 1. They know too much to live. (Wouldn't make it past the first round of Survivor). They have been lobotomized by the Visual tool sets and the younger ones who don't remember C and hand edited make files are struggling. 2. They laugh when I suggest that using Alerts and MessageBoxes might be worthy. I go back three days later and guess what.... Boxes galore. 3. The concepts and application of namespaces comes hard. It defies what they are used to and the implementations do things they hate (eg, carrying forward the namespace into the output where they didn't expect to see it having become convinced they only put the xmlns= att for validation). This is still bleeding edge tech. The challenge to create really comprehensive robust building tools is still unmet but I have the same hope as when I saw N&F demoed in Atlanta some years ago. Some of the papers from MS of late on the BizTalk orchestration editors are fascinating. I didn't think I would ever see the CreateRFQ, ReplyQ sorts of enterprise management tools. Gad! The lunatic fringe has been validated by a company once considered their mortal enemies. How things change! DTDs like paper will go away when something as robust and easy to use is provided. Until then, we live in a mixed environment. The convictions of the W3C members are not convincing, evidentiary, or compelling. That Schemas are needed is not in doubt. That we will abandon DTDs anytime soon is. Like HTML, there is too much legacy to lose the form therefore compatibility and bloat will be the price of evolution, same as it ever was. Len Bullard clbullar@i... http://fly.hiwaay.net/~cbullard/lensongs.ram Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti. Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h -----Original Message----- From: G. Ken Holman [mailto:gkholman@C...] Personally, I don't, which is why I'm anxious to see what Whitehill offers to see the way they support their claims. It is exciting to think these tools are on their way. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
