[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Leventhal's challenge misses the point
There is one other issue that you're missing here -- will the non-programmer be as willing to learn JavaScript as XSL? This is probably dependent on the person and their background, but there is at least one really big point in favor of XSL over the programming/scripting laguages (at least in my opinion). In fact, I've heard it mentioned by programmers in this list for why XSL is so *hard* -- it relates rather naturally to how documents are structured. That might not make it simpler to learn for a graphic designer, but it does for writers (myself included). I've put style sheets together for documents in word processors, DTP packages, and in style editors for SGML (and now XML). The tools **do** make it easier, and XSL doesn't really have any right now. But believe me, learning some of the intricasies of XSL is still a very small step for me in comparison to learing JavaScript. And this is step I'm willing to take, but programming is not. Sara Mitchell Kay Michael wrote: > > > Firstly, I do not believe that non-programmers can't use XSL. I *am* a > > non-programmer (and the fact that I subscribe to this list > > doesn't change that) and I *have* learnt (well.. or am learning) to use > XSL. > > But then, non-programmers can learn programming too. What we really want is > evidence that non-programmers can learn XSL more easily than they can learn > (say) Javascript. > > Mike Kay > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|