Re: XSL intent survey
Oren Ben-Kiki said: > > I guess a 13-to-1 majority in favor of something is less impressive when > only 8.75% of the subscribers bother to vote. More then nine out of ten > subscribers either don't care about the issue or don't have an opinion... I > find either alternative pretty dicouraging. > > I'll forward the survey results as they stand anyway - together with this > dismal figure - to the W3 organization. > I wouldn't take this so hard. Consider how many people join a list like this, read the messages for a while, then tune out. Many others just lurk, as they have some interest in the topic and figure this is a good way to learn some more. Others join as a matter of technical support, hoping to learn more as they try to use XSL, and ask questions when they get stuck. Of those that remain after you remove these categories, not everyone may feel that they are knowledgeable enough to express a strong opinion on such hefty issues as these. I, myself, didn't formally vote, but rather expressed my opinion that I feel the whole XSL project is heading somewhat in the wrong direction. So, if you can ascertain answers to some of the more general questions in your survey from that, feel free. :) As long as I'm here, I may as well address one other issue that someone mentioned in response to one of my posts. That is, the issue of catering to web vs. print. I think Chris Maden is right, that this is not really an issue, as it just propagates the "web formatting [expletive deleted]" concept. I believe the issue does exist, however, in the form of simplicity vs. power. Some just want very basic, easy to use, tools for formatting, while others want more powerful tools that they are willing to take some extra time to learn (not to say that a more powerful tool has to be hard to use, but there will always be more learning involved in knowing how to take advantage of more power). I assert that the "layered" approach I suggested would address this issue better than any other approach, through one of two options. The first would be to produce a powerful language which gives access to more primitive but powerful constructs, then layer a simpler, more abstract language on top of that. Or, we could even produce two parallel languages at the same level, both built on top of the same functional base. -Brandon :) XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
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