• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• To: <noah_mendelsohn@u...>,<abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
• Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 08:33:39 +0100

> ... So, even if the work required to create the 
> the translation schema (or XSLT) language itself were 
> negligible, there would be at least some detrimental impacts 
> on international interoperability.  While it certainly is a 
> problem that tags like <element> make sense primarily in 
> English, at least a schema written using that tag will be 
> understood by any Schema processor. 

And perhaps the biggest question of all: would anyone use it?

Standards succeed because users believe they will succeed; everyone wants to
use what everyone else is using, because they think that will maximize the
reusability of their code, their ability to switch suppliers, and their
ability to acquire skilled staff. In that climate, I find it hard to see
anyone choosing to write XSLT code with Danish keywords. Perhaps there would
be a critical mass of users in one or two countries such as Japan that have
large populations of developers with relatively weak English; but if there
were a demand for it, it would surely have been done by now.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

• References:
  • Re: Non-English languages in XSLT, XML Schema grammars
    • From: "Anthony B. Coates (XML-Dev)" <abcoatesecure-xmldev@y...>
  • Re: Re: Non-English languages in XSLT, XML Schema grammars
    • From: noah_mendelsohn@u...