RE: Leventhal's challenge misses the point

I think <xsl:apply-templates select="foo"> is a lot more intuitive than the
equivalent javascript. Many will be at least familar with the way tags
work.

Someone here made the point that there is a division of labor in the dtp
world - generally speaking text editors (what most of us think of when we
think editor), art editors (they prefer to be called directors, and are
responsible for look and feel type issues) and technical editors
(responsible for the actual production). It is this last group that is
extremely fluent in automating their processes, and is largely responsible
for transforming the work of the other two areas into a finished piece. As
a group, they are highly likely to understand it, use it and stretch its
limitations.

Jack Bolles





Kay Michael <Michael.Kay@xxxxxxx>@mulberrytech.com on 05/28/99 10:53:03 AM

Please respond to xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Sent by:  owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


To:   "'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx'" <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
cc:

Subject:  RE: Leventhal's challenge misses the point


> 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