Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
 > to work with HTML daily in large applications, often maked-up from vast
 > data sets (I work for Dialog a very large content provider)
 > in ASP... an XML/XSL solution isn't mere "sweeties" but air for a drowning
 > man.
what does XSL give you that DSSSL doesnt, out of interest?

 > trust me they aren't even on the same planet. Yes producing XML
 > transformations in script is straight forward. Producing
 > stable, easily tested, scalable, bug free implimentations inlarge
 > applications is another matter.
this is what i find odd. given that you wont have (by definition) a
well-tested XSL implementation until some while after the language is
frozen, and given that you have `scripts' in XSL, i am not entirely sure
why (apart from the pain of converting later), you cannot achieve 
"stable, easily tested, scalable, bug free " just as easily in eg a
very  stable animal like Omnimark.

 > As for 70% of XML being used in machine interchange... yes you're probably
 > right... but somebody has to engineer that interchange. It doesn't happen
 > magicaly.
Oracle can make up 70% single-handedly, probably :-}

 > One of the main reasons that I see for the Web being "broke" is that
 > standards take such a rediculously long time to ratify. You can level a
good lord, do you know how long *real* standards take, as opposed to
these W3C jollies? and the reason is that dotting i's and crossing t's
is  so worthwhile.

 > certain amount of blame at the feet of MS and NS, but if standards are
 > crawling at a fraction of the speed of technology, the browser companies
 > *will* jump ahead. 

hey guys (whoops, sorry about pun), this isnt the 1980s any more. take
a deep breath, relax, the world will not explode in flames if the
computer industry has a few more storms. I know it *seems* like the
fate of the civilised world rests on the shoulders of XSL, but I doubt
if most Indians (the c.w.) have even heard of it....

Sebastian


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