Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: James Robertson <email@example.com>
- To: "XML Developers' List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Sun, 23 May 1999 13:55:51 +1000
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
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
Step Two Designs Pty Ltd
SGML, XML & HTML Consultancy
"Beyond the Idea"
ACN 081 019 623
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:email@example.com
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org the following message;
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org)