Re: XSLT vs Omnimark

Vincent,

First of all - thank  you for the letter.

> I don't know if some of you know Omnimark. It is a streaming
> programming language and it works like XSLT but allows to include
> programming instructions and can react to many more events (others than
> tags).
> I want to make use of one of this technology to process an XML file. Do
> someone know some pros and cons of both "products" to help me to make a
> choice ?

I'l be also very interested to hear if somebody is using this ... strange ... product.
I mean Omnimark. ( and why do the use it ).

<omnimarksite>
http://www.omnimark.com/develop/om5/index.html

OmniMark is English-like, and task-specific.
Rich, expressive pattern-matching makes OmniMark more
readable and more powerful than Perl.

</omnimarksite>

Especialy I'l be very interested to know if  there is something real behind the
sentence above.  Actualy, when I see such sentences,  I become very sceptic
about the product. Many of them tried to kill perl, but trying to kill perl in *that*
area?
Hardly possible, I think.  Larry have build a great thing inheriting the most usesful
ideas inveneted by some other smart people.  I'm not talking about the implementation,
but   when somebody says : "we have better regular expressions than perl has" ... )

Looking at their examples I failed to find any answer why they are promoting
this as a "Key Features and Benefits" N 1.

Why OmniMark is more readable and more powerful than Perl?
Maybe because they have 'letter' but not  \w ?

I think Omnimark is yet another eclectic (and wrong) reincarnation of perl.

XSLT is absolutely different concept.  I don't understand how those 2 things
could be compared. We are not comparing XSLT with perl, right ?

Rgds.Paul.

PS. By the way - even I'm very interested  to know better about any
alternatives to XSLT,  I think Omnimark vs XSLT looks like offtopic here.
Omnimark vs Perl could be a cool topic for Perl-XML list.



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