RE: LINQ to XML versus XSLT

My reply is getting a little off-topic, but on the same note, why
haven't we seen a widely-used XML-based HTML preprocessor language yet?
I mean, for tag-based languages like HTML and XML, you'd think it would
make sense. People are always singing the praises of PHP and Ruby, but
when it comes down to working with XML and finally creating the HTML for
the page, the methods used get downright ugly. ColdFusion comes close,
and the company I work for uses a proprietary preprocessor that's close
to ColdFusion, but neither of them are true XML. Where's the conceptual
holdup?

~ Scott

-----Original Message-----
From: Alexander Johannesen [mailto:alexander.johannesen@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 10:07 AM
To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re:  LINQ to XML versus XSLT

On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 16:33, Colin Paul Adams
<colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> But I don't agree that it is a good idea. What should the type look
> like? Certainly not the W3C DOM.

DOM was yet another inbaked API, nothing more. No, XML as native to
languages should, IMHO, look like XML, where <result> =
<value>{$variable}</value> + <value>{$other}</value> ; becomes ;

   <result> <value>...</value> <value>...</value> </result>

or ;

   result = <some.xml /> ;
   <root version="1.0"> += result ;
   <root version="1.3" /> ;

Is ;

   <root version="1.3">
      <some.xml />
   </root>

I'm sure if a bunch of people think about this for a little while we
could come up with something that's pretty cool, and urge languages to
adopt it. I personally would like to see more XPath and XSLT goodness
in it, perhaps even with template definitions. As if. :(


Alex
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
 Project Wrangler, SOA, Information Alchemist, UX, RESTafarian, Topic
Maps
------------------------------------------ http://shelter.nu/blog/
--------