RE: Design culture (Was: Designing XML for XSLT)

Trevor wrote:
>  I was wondering why, having identified a weakness in a design, people
> seem to find it impossible to get the design changed.  Of course
> design changes should never be taken lightly, but I have always
> thought it a strength of XML (and XSLT more so) that it has an
> inherent flexibility missing from many other ways of constructing
> software.  Am I wrong?

One solution, though not ideal, to overcome weak markup design may be to run two transforms on the original XML. The first one to transform it to the desired XML design and a second one to do whatever grouping or other functions are required.

Trevor also suggested:
> Don't design markup languages specifically for XSLT ;-)

In which case the above suggestion will allow for the mark up to be designed as seen fit to describe the data, and the first XSLT can transform it to what is deemed best for transformations.

Jeni wrote:
>Does anyone know of a set of guidelines for designing markup languages
>for processing with XSLT?
</snip>
>Any others?
We could also restart the perennial discussion on whether to use elements or attributes ;-)

Joshua

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This message and any attachment is confidential and may be privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.  If you have received it by mistake please let us know by reply and then delete it from your system; you should not copy the message or disclose its contents to anyone.





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