Re: 2.6 patterns: let's try variations on the XML syntax

On Wed, 26 Aug 1998, Chris von See wrote:

> If I read this correctly, the implicit assumption is that all of these
> languages need to be capable of being hand-coded by relative newbies...
> I've seen other comments in this list say that this is in fact a goal of
> XML and XSL, but I tend to disagree that we should make that a *primary*
> goal.  I believe that we should not subjugate developing powerful tools to
> developing a syntax that "feels as if it belongs together". 

Why do you believe that these goals diverge? Usually, they do not. An 
elegant design is simple enough for newbies and scales to do the powerful 
things that experts want to do. The string-based query language seems 
relativly simple and scalable, so we need not choose between those 
(usually linked) design criteria.

 Paul Prescod


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list