Re: XSLT/XPath 2.0 (was "Identifying two tags...")

Jeni wrote: 

> I don't think that you are in the minority in terms of being
impatient
> for a version of XSLT with the benefits that we thought we were going
> to get a year ago. Nor do I think you are in the minority in terms of
> being concerned about the complexity of the new WDs and the amount
> that it appears we'll have to learn in order to understand them. It's
> good to raise those concerns now, while the WGs are still considering
> which parts of, for example, XPath 2.0 are really necessary. I
> encourage you, and indeed everyone, to write to
> public-qt-comments@xxxxxx describing what parts you find particularly
> hard to understand and which parts you think are unnecessary.

Jeni and all friends,

Let's not waste our time in politics -- an area in which technical
people are not strong at all.

Better, use your time to produce user-valued products that will be used
along with XSLT/XPath 1.0, 2.0 and later versions to come.

Avoid being dependent on the output of a standards committee by
creating your own de-facto standard with a good application or a
library of functions.

It's a much better use of one's time to produce a new good library
module, than to try to convince a standards body that the majority is
what you think it is.

You can create a real and significant majority -- the majority of
users, satisfied by your products.

If there'd be vacuum in the coming specs, let's fill it with our own
hands.

Let's not wait for years, for life is short.

Cheers,
Dimitre Novatchev.





__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
LAUNCH - Your Yahoo! Music Experience
http://launch.yahoo.com

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