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

Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0

• To: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>, xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• From: Dave Pawson <dpawson@n...>
• Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 21:06:20 +0100
• In-reply-to: <3EE628F4.7020507@b...>
• References: <B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F80648446D@R...><B885BEDCB3664E4AB1C72F1D85CB29F80648446D@R...>

At 11:52 10/06/2003 -0700, Erik Bruchez wrote:

>The way I see things, in a first phase most people just won't use the
>typing features of XSLT 2.0 and just use it as a better XSLT 1.0.

Without the type stuff, its little better than 1.0


>Regarding the difficulties, I agree, but it's in general easier to
>teach a language that is well-designed rather than one that is not.

Which is why 1.0 succeeded?

>  So
>teaching XSLT's functional nature may be difficult, but at least it is
>based on sound concepts. RTFs are not.

It was realised that rtf's were dead in 1.1
That's history.
Other goodies have come in via Mike Kays extensions, exslt's extensions.
They were wanted.
Then along came the ((((( typing )))))
    Like walking through a database in big boots with the laces tied together.

regards DaveP
   A self declared dochead.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>

• References:
  • RE: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: "Dare Obasanjo" <dareo@m...>
  • Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
    • From: Erik Bruchez <erik@b...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Sample expat code for reading entities?
• Next by Date: Re: Market-driven vice Committee-driven technology evolution
• Previous by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Next by thread: Re: xPath 2.0, XSLT 2.0 ... size increase over v1.0
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread