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

RE: killing xslt

Subject: RE: killing xslt
From: "M. David Peterson" <m.david@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 02:25:21 -0600
xslt future
Looks like I mixed 2 thoughts into one in this last post.  

This section:

" If we all jump in and support the effort to get XSLT 2.0 up and
running on getting completely dogged in the media..."

Should read more like:

"If we all jump in and support the effort to get XSLT 2.0 up and running
on .NET as quickly as possible maybe we can avoid XSLT's future as a
development tool getting completely dogged in the media and as such
avoid having to perform any type of resuscitation in the coming months
by jumping out of the gate with a "doesn't matter, we've already
developed XSLT 2.0 support and here it is" message to deliver to the
decision makers who are driving the development efforts of our future."

Sorry 'bout that!  I started one thought process and then added to that
process a bit later.  Looks like I didn't properly conjoin the edits :)

Hope the above now makes more sense :)

<M:D/>


> -----Original Message-----
> From: M. David Peterson [mailto:m.david@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 1:40 AM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE:  killing xslt
> 
> FanFREAKINtastic!  Do you have a sense for when the port will be
> completed and is there anything I can do to help?  If nothing else
would
> love to QA this for you as Im sure there are many here who would love
to
> do the same :)
> 
> Thanks for the information!  I myself plan to do a simple run of the
> Saxon 7.9.x code through the MS Java to C# conversion utility and see
> where we end up.  If it goes well this would be an ideal situation for
> MS to highlight their conversion tool as something that does a swell
job
> of creating a platform to platform conversion of Java "with only X% of
> hand massaging the code to get from one "executable" to the other."
If
> we all jump in and support the effort to get XSLT 2.0 up and running
on
> getting completely dogged in the media and as such avoid having to
> perform any type of resuscitation in the coming months by jumping out
of
> the gate with a "doesn't matter, we've already developed XSLT 2.0
> support and here it is" message to deliver to the decision makers who
> are driving the development efforts of our future.  Nobody from MS has
> dared yet to say that they chose XQuery because they feel it is a
> superior technology to XSLT but instead because of a combination of
> reasons (all dependent on how you translate Mark Fussell's original
blog
> (http://weblogs.asp.net/mfussell/archive/2004/05/13/130969.aspx) and
the
> follow up from Dare Obasanjo's "clarification" post
> (http://blogs.msdn.com/dareobasanjo/archive/2004/05/13/131166.aspx))
> that stem from there desire to evangelize and convert a larger base of
> potential developers who "prefer" the SQL-like syntax of SQL over the
> XML-based syntax of XSLT.  That leaves a golden opportunity for all of
> us who have taken the time to learn and as such embrace XSLT and it's
> functional-based nature to stand up and say that we will take on the
> continued development and support of XSLT for version 2.0 and beyond.
> In Mark Fussell's post he mentioned a 5 year "window" in which they
will
> know if they made the right decision.  Sounds like just the right time
> frame for MS to be able to jump back into things for what could
> potentially be the release of XSLT 3.0 if they find that the decision
> they made did more harm than good.  But in the mean time the support
> will be on all of our collective shoulders.  I know I am definitely
down
> for the challenge! :D
> 
> I've just read arpande's post "PROMISES, PROMISES"
> (http://blogs.msdn.com/arpande/archive/2004/05/13/131408.aspx) which
is
> a follow up to the post's from above.  Although I still believe there
> decision to be wrong it does give a more logical breakdown of why they
> made the decision that they did (giving a TON of credibility and
> foundational support to Michael Kay's "suggestion" that this all stems
> from funding issues and the fact that XQuery's SQL-like syntax has
> generated more internal funding because of the simple fact that SQL
> Server and other SQL-based tools and products make money where as XSLT
> has no product base to dip into for support) and how they have
continued
> to push the existing XSLT/XPath 1.0 implementations into the "Whidbey"
> product and as such are not killing XSLT so much as deciding that the
> current XSLT/XPath releases provide enough functionality to drive the
> areas in which XQuery lack's capability or where other products
provide
> the necessary support to the additional functionality made available
in
> XSLT/XPath 2.0 - simply stated as template-based matching
> transformations.  The part of the post I find most interesting - and
had
> at one point in my post to Mark Fussell's blog written about 1/2 a
> paragraph on before deciding not to take the post to far away from the
> XSLT core and as such deleted it - was conclusion 3 stemming from the
> content of paragraph 4:
> 
> "ASP.NET 2.0 is a phenomenal product.  Many of us believe that one of
> our key XSLT scenarios, HTML generation, will be greatly diminished
with
> the ease in which an ASP.NET solution can be developed.  There will
> still be cases for XSLT on a web server, however this will be reduced
in
> time."
> 
> I think we can finally say that we have found the core reason behind
the
> decision to drop support for XSLT 2.0 - It competes with ASP and has
> been doing so since day one.  I was working on the Redmond campus when
> XSLT first appeared on the scene and at the time found it curious that
> MS was even considering support given the fact that it was in many
ways
> a direct competitor to ASP in the area of dynamic generation of HTML.
> In fact it was for this very reason (as well as an email that was sent
> out during the same time frame from an MS-Exec - wouldn't be proper
(as
> well as contractually legal) to say who - to all the developers at MS
> describing the changes on the horizon that were being driven by XML
and
> that if we wanted to be marketable commodities in the years to come
that
> we had better do all we can to learn as much as we can about XML and
all
> of its related technologies) that I decided to invest my time into
> learning XSLT/XPath as well as Web Services and other XML-based
> technologies.  My thought at the time was that if MS felt this
strongly
> about these technologies that they were willing to add support for
them
> directly into products that were in many ways there direct competitors
> then I had better pay attention.  And I'm glad I did.  Although my
> dynamic web development experience began with MS and ASP in '96 and
has
> been the foundation of most of my dynamic web development ever since
> XSLT won my heart over many years ago for its ability to transform XML
> in a way that no other technology can even come close.  I guess we
shall
> see just what arpande means when we are given access to the ASP.NET
2.0
> bits.  None-the-less I have every plan and intention to do all I can
to
> see XSLT 2.0 support made available to the .NET platform.
> 
> I have to fly to Denver for the day tomorrow but my weekend has been
> dog-eared to jump into the Java-to-C# conversion of Saxon to be run on
> just where we're at with getting the port to C# up and running.  I am
> REALLY looking forward to taking a look at your Eiffel-based port of
> Saxon 7.9.x!  Again, let me know if I can in any way be of assistance
to
> you.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> <M:D/>
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Colin Paul Adams [mailto:colin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 10:27 PM
> > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re:  killing xslt
> >
> > >>>>> "David" == M David Peterson <m.david@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> >
> >     David> There is too much opportunity here for me to believe that
> >     David> someone hasn't already begun either a port of Saxon or a
> >     David> brand new engine that will support the 2.0 standard on
> >     David> .NET.
> >
> > I'm (unintentionally) porting Saxon to .NET.
> > That is, I'm translating it into Eiffel for use within (and without)
> > Gobo (http://www.gobosoft.com) - the open-source portable Eiffel
> library.
> > Since Gobo support for Eiffel compilers includes ESI Envision
product
> > (which compiles Eiffel code to the .NET platform), this means it
will
> > be runnable on .NET.
> > --
> > Colin Paul Adams
> > Preston Lancashire

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.