RE: questions about XSLT philosophy: how much is too m

Robert P. J. Day wrote:

> ok, i think i've been properly chastised -- i'll get back to work
> now. :-P

I realize you are joking (:-P after all), but I couldn't let this slide.
Asking questions like this is necessary.  It may or may not make sense at
the language definition level, but it really does make sense at the project
level.  A project which knee jerks to a given technology, without asking if
it is the right application of that technology, is asking for problems and
not really meeting the customer needs.

And has been already stated often the difficult problems raised here are not
only because of a difficulty with using or lack of knowledge of XSLT, but
because someone threw an XML document format together without considering
the downstream use of that data.

	Steve

P.S. As an off-topic aside:  To be honest, one of my favorite examples of
knee jerk use of a technology is ebXML.  "We need an XML based EDI data
format so data can be easily transferred and handled electronically." But
isn't EDI already electronic?  Isn't EDI already standardized for a lot of
transactions?  And aren't there a ton of systems which support EDI and can
even translate it into other formats?

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