Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
At 01:37 22/05/1999 , Paul Prescod wrote: | I think that it is worth noting that most of the people who are in the | "XSL camp" are people are thoroughly familiar with scripting languages. | The reverse is not true. We have tried both and found the XSL way to be | more convenient. There is no programming language that quite captures | XSL's optimized mix of "polymorphic dispatch", pattern matching and | convenient template description. What I'm keeping an interested eye on is the process of "retiring" specifications. There are so many X*L specifications, recommendations, and notes at the moment, most must die in due course as a part of a process of natural selection. I think we will most likely end up with only a handful of widely-used standards, with the rest consigned to the annals of history. Will XSL be one of the sucesssful standards? I don't know. What I can say is that personally I use Omnimark (which is now free for all) for this sort of work, and I'm very happy with it. Looking at the expressiveness of XSL, I have doubts. But I don't claim to be representative of any cross-section of the XML community. Just an interested observer, and a practical implementer. Cheers, James ------------------------- James Robertson Step Two Designs Pty Ltd SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy http://www.steptwo.com.au/ jamesr@s... "Beyond the Idea" ACN 081 019 623 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...)
|
