James Clark wrote:

> There are many, real-world transformation problems for which XSLT is not
> the right tool.  I would never claim that XSLT is the one true
> transformation language for XML.  Whether it's a good choice for a
> particular transformation problem depends on a number of factors,
> including the following.

My thanks for posting this, James. Too often it is difficult to get such an
objective position from someone as close to the coalface as you are. I (and
I'm sure others) sometimes find it difficult to come to a decision about new
technology because I feel that if have to test-drive it to know what it's
really suited for. Information about transformations that XSLT is not
particularly suited to tend to carry more credibility than use-cases where
people have managed to get the right tesults out of arguably the wrong
technology.

PS - I'm not pro- or anti- anything - I just don't get enough time to play,
so rely on the opinions of others more than I would like to.


--
Regards,

Marcus Carr                      email:  mrc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
___________________________________________________________________
Allette Systems (Australia)      www:    http://www.allette.com.au
___________________________________________________________________
"Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler."
       - Einstein



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