Re: syntax feedback

"Simon St.Laurent" wrote:
> 
> The W3C has made some very strange moves, but putting CSS and XSL into
> direct competition is one of the strangest.  

They are not in competition. I admit that XSL is much more complex and
thus will not be as popular among low-end stylists as CSS will be. CSS's
inventors admit that CSS is much less powerful and thus *cannot solve* the
problems that XSL is designed to solve. They are no more in competition
than HTML and XML or a Chevy Metro and a Chevy Camaro. 

> I fear it may hobble both, as
> developers struggle over which to support with the most resources.  XSL is
> more 'powerful' in that it provides transformation, but otherwise I'm
> afraid it's not that exciting - unless you've had experience with the tools
> that have inspired its particular direction of development.

"Other than the fact that it goes really fast, the Camaro isn't very much
more interesting than the Metro." If you need a fast car (e.g. to satisfy
your ego or to catch Bad Guys) then you don't really have any choice and
thus there isn't any competition.

XSL is the third standard stylesheet technology to be used by the generic
markup world. The first one failed because it did not allow
transformations. CSS was never even a contender because it did not do
transformations.

> I'll stay out of the battle on particulars, but the mere fact that CSS and
> XSL are in direct contention is a matter for deep concern.

Our own tests demonstrate that they are NOT in contention. CSS people do
not like XSL because they don't understand why it has added complexity
because their problems do not require the added complexity. If you do NOT
need transformation, then there is no benefit in XSL's higher cognitive
load, so CSS makes much more sense. So they stick out their tongue at it
(as you have described).

XSL people cannot use CSS except as an adjunct to XSL. If you need
transformation, then you don't really have any choice about whether to use
CSS or XSL and there is also no competition. CSS can't even handle a
simple cross-reference (nor should it be extended to! It's good at what it
does)

According to our own informal survey, these technologies are not in
contention, direct or otherwise. They are complementary.

 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

"Sports utility vehicles are gated communities on wheels" - Anon


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