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

Re: <xsl-script>

Subject: Re: <xsl-script>
From: Rick Geimer <rick.geimer@xxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 08:53:46 -0700
arrested development script
Here's my $0.02. I've been a heavy user and believer in OmniMark for years now,
and will continue to be, since XSL has chosen to limit itself to dealing
strictly with XML on both the input and output side.

However, I do have a keen interest in using XSL for XML to XML transformations,
even though I am more comfortable with OmniMark. The primary reason from my
point of view is simple, I don't want to keep my core transformation logic in a
proprietary language if there is a standard that I can use instead. Personally,
I think OmniMark should incorporate an XSL transformation module into their
language to attract a larger user base and position themselves as a standards
supporter vs a proprietary solution, but this is unlikely to happen unless it
is developed by a third party as an external function library.

In the mean time, there is plenty of room for both technologies. XSL isn't
going to be able to transform RTF (yuck) to XML any time soon, and OmniMark
isn't going to run in anybody's web browser, even with an <xsl:script> tag.

Rick Geimer
National Semiconductor

"John E. Simpson" wrote:

> At 10:04 AM 05/13/1999 +1000, James Robertson wrote:
> >Seriously, though, I do think that XSL needs to
> >prove itself against systems such as Omnimark.
> >
> >Particularly since Omnimark LE is free, and can
> >probably do 95-100% of everything that has been
> >written in XSL so far.
> Sure. Just as long as you recognize that 95% of XML users may be 100%
> disinclined to acquire and learn a new language. This is a specious
> argument -- by the same token, I can do everything that OmniMark does with
> Fortran (please don't ask me to, though :).
> >And XSL will never match the full functionality
> >of Omnimark.
> You may be right, although I wouldn't lay money on it. ("Never" is a
> dangerous word to use in prognosticating technology.) If you know OmniMark,
> you're all set. This may remain true even if you opt never to learn, let
> alone use, XSL. XSL doesn't have to "prove itself" against OmniMark, DSSSL,
> or anything else -- except for people/organizations who don't already have
> an investment in them.
> ==========================================================
> John E. Simpson            | The secret of eternal youth
> simpson@xxxxxxxxxxx        | is arrested development.
> http://www.flixml.org      |  -- Alice Roosevelt Longworth
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

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

Current Thread


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.
First Name
Last Name
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.