Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On 22/05/2010 13:12, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Hi Folks, > > Note: In the following I am just talking about XSLT. I am not talking about XSL-FO. > > XSLT is a programming language. It is used to create programs. Personally, I never use XSLT to perform styling. As Ken said, this is unlikely to be true. > When was the last time you used XSLT to set a font color or > background color? Most days. > I use CSS to do styling. If I use CSS then often as not xslt is inserting the classes that affect the styles, if I'm generating xsl-fo or TeX or input to 3b2 then the styling aspect is even more visible.
This is trying to take everyone back 12 years to the discussion of whether to use xsl:stylesheet or xsl:transform. Most people quickly realised it was a pointless discussion and simply use xsl:stylesheet always. > For example, say this: "I wrote an XSLT program to screen-scrape > Yahoo Finance." Don't say this: "I wrote an XSLT stylesheet to > screen-scrape Yahoo Finance." > > > It is regrettable that XSLT is an acronym standing for > XML _Stylesheet_ Language Transformations. History is informative, not regrettable. > As described above, rarely (if ever) is XSLT used for styling. Thus, > the acronym is completely misleading. This leads to my second > recommendation. > > RECOMMENDATION #2 > > Stop treating XSLT as an acronym. It is just the name of a programming language, just as Java is the name of a programming language. > > Comments?
David
|
