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

RE: Re: XSLT and the 80/20 point (was RE: Tim Bray on "Which T

• To: 'Mike Champion' <mc@x...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: RE: Re: XSLT and the 80/20 point (was RE: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?")
• From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
• Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 13:06:35 -0600

Except in hindsight.  Everyone is an expert at that.
XML was designed "in hindsight".

Hindsight matters.

len

From: Mike Champion [mailto:mc@x...]

3/18/2002 1:07:40 PM, "Evan Lenz" <elenz@x...> wrote:

> On the other hand, difficulty of comprehension should not be a
>criterion. XSLT is a difficult language, because its most powerful
>mechanism--template rules--is new and unusual to many programmers, and
>therefore hard to learn.

Fair enough.  I'll gladly concede the point.  Thanks for reminding us 
that something can be difficult for the uninitiated to grasp, but 
still hit the 80/20 point.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Re: XSLT and the 80/20 point (was RE: Tim Bray on " Which Technologies Matter?")
    • From: Jonathan Robie <jonathan.robie@s...>

• Prev by Date: Re: RE: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Next by Date: RE: Tim Bray on "Which Technologies Matter?"
• Previous by thread: RE: "Which Technologies Matter?" & xml processing models...
• Next by thread: RE: Re: XSLT and the 80/20 point (was RE: Tim Bray on " Which Technologies Matter?")
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread