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

RE: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts

• To: Dare Obasanjo <dareo@m...>
• Subject: RE: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• From: bry@i...
• Date: Fri, 9 May 2003 21:16:25 CET
• Cc: xml-dev@l...

> they neither have used nor tried to 
>understand. 
Okay I can't really say I've tried to use 
xslt 2.0 much, I have the latest Saxon but 
pretty much all my work revolves around 
msxml 4.0
That said I have tried to understand it, 
aside from the irrational anti-xsdl stuff I 
have an antipathy to xpath having 
conditional and for expressions, as I 
personally thought that should be part of 
the individual programming language 
environment calling xpath rather than xpath 
itself, and I fear that their presence might 
cause debugging problems for people with 
code to maintain and not the great xpath 
expertise. These concerns I decided to drop 
however because I considered the irrational 
anti-xsdl stuff more important, basically I 
saw it as a compromise. 

> I've read the few
> complaints about XQuery & XSLT 2.0 and 
>besides irrational FUD about
> dependencies on W3C XML Schema have failed 
>to see any valid issues
> brought up. 

I don't have too much of a complaint about 
XQuery having xsdl dependencies, I think 
it's fine that one language has it, but all 
of them has to have it, I thought the 
intellectual fashion nowadays was to be 
something of a latter-day pseudo-Darwinian 
and allow one's languages to fight it out 
with survival of the most fit being the goal.

That said I'm sure you've probably gone over 
the many ways that concerns about xslt 2.0 
dependencies is so much irrational FUD in 
some other post in the past, can you send me 
the link so I don't have to google all over 
for your response? As an aside you seem to 
be of two minds on this irrational FUD, as 
you characterize it, as you claim that aside 
from that you have not seen any valid issues 
brought up, implying that you also see it as 
something of a valid issue.

• Follow-Ups:
  • RE: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
    • From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Clumping of W3C Specifications
• Next by Date: RE: Cranky old farts and the static typing critics (was Re: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts)
• Previous by thread: XPath Data Model proposal (was: nostalgia)
• Next by thread: RE: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Working Drafts
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread