• From: John Cowan <cowan@l...>
• To: XML Dev <xml-dev@i...>
• Date: Mon, 24 May 1999 11:12:02 -0400

David Megginson wrote:

[statement that XSL is "at least two orders of magnitude more
complicated" than CSS1]

Gak, what a thought.  Can we really use tools that differ by
a complexity of 100 from other tools?  Consider the idea of
a programming language 100 times simpler than C, or 100 times
more complex than Standard C++.  Can the mind really grasp
such a thing?

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@c...
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i...
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Weighing in on XSL / Standards
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• References:
  • Weighing in on XSL / Standards
    • From: "Joshua E. Smith" <jesmith@k...>
  • re: Weighing in on XSL / Standards
    • From: David Megginson <david@m...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Weighing in on XSL / Standards
• Next by Date: Re: searching for search
• Previous by thread: re: Weighing in on XSL / Standards
• Next by thread: Re: Weighing in on XSL / Standards
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread