[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Sun, 16 Feb 2003 20:28:26 -0800, Charles White <chuck@tumeric.net>
wrote:
> I think I made a fair inference, and I would also argue that XSLT isn't
> unapproachable to the average XML developer.
I tend to agree with Dare here. XSLT requires some mental gymnastics that
are difficult for ordinary procedural programmers (such as moi, to be
honest) to get used to. I used to think I was just particularly dumb on
this score, but I've heard from plenty of XML newbies (and, ahem, a few
veterans with a couple of beers under their belt) who just run into a brick
wall when they try to do something non-trivial in XSLT. I'm thinking that
I think my condition may be fairly widespread, and for what it's worth,
XQuery's approach seems much more easily understandable to at least this
one XSLT-challenged person.
That's not to say that there's anything wrong with XSLT, just that having
a roughly equivalent technology that is more approachable by a
conventionally trained developer (XQuery for SQL folks, a Javascript or X#
with built in XML support for procedural folks, whatever) might indeed make
XML more popular as a data model/syntax to be exposed rather than hidden
behind wizards and GUIs.
|
