[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: XSL intent survey

Subject: Re: XSL intent survey
From: Brandon Ibach <bibach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 1998 10:59:28 -0600 (CST)
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


Current Thread

PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!

Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced!

Buy Stylus Studio Now

Download The World's Best XML IDE!

Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today!

Don't miss another message! Subscribe to this list today.
Email
First Name
Last Name
Company
Subscribe in XML format
RSS 2.0
Atom 0.3
Site Map | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks
Free Stylus Studio XML Training:
W3C Member
Stylus Studio® and DataDirect XQuery ™are products from DataDirect Technologies, is a registered trademark of Progress Software Corporation, in the U.S. and other countries. © 2004-2013 All Rights Reserved.