|
|
The Pithy Words of Wisdom Challenge (Was: Ten new XQuery, XSLT 2.0 and)
|
[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Dare,
You seem to claim that there are no substantive problems with the XQuery/XPath/XSLT triumvirate, dismissing concerns as "irrational FUD".
You also seem to claim that there are no dependencies on XSD Schema. Which I find an interesting claim. None? Really?
So .... why don't you produce a clear, concise ... pithy even :) .... summary of how you see the situation for an XSLT 1.0 stylesheet author who either hasn't heard of W3C XML Schema or hasn't got any serious grasp of it.
Address it to XSLT 1.0 stylesheet authors who might want to upgrade but are a little cautious ... worried even. Tell him / her what will work and what they will need to take into account to write working XSLT 2.0 stylesheets.
I am sure it would make very interesting reading for members of the XSL-List mailing list as well as this list. Dave Pawson, with your permission of course, would likely be happy to post it or a link to it in his XSLT FAQ.
It seems to me that a document which summarises the situation and explains how an XSLT 1.0 stylesheet author can upgrade to XSLT 2.0 would be a much more constructive contribution than sweeping statements about others on the list. Don't you agree?
Are you up for the "Pithy Words of Wisdom Challenge" to rationally and eloquently counter this "irrational FUD" which seemingly so incenses you?
We cranky old men will lean on our cyber walking sticks, smoking our cyber clay pipes and await your response with interest. :)
Andrew Watt
In a message dated 09/05/2003 19:29:04 GMT Daylight Time, dareo@microsoft.com writes:
The fundamental complaint I have about XML-DEV is that people are very
good at generating megabytes of mail traffic about technologies they
neither have used nor tried to understand. XML-DEV is a festival of
cranky old men complaining about the "youth of today" and how things
were better in the XML world in the old days. I've read the few
complaints about XQuery & XSLT 2.0 and besides irrational FUD about
dependencies on W3C XML Schema have failed to see any valid issues
brought up.
This is unfortunate since I was hoping I'd see more criticisms of the
family of specs from a technical perspective besides what we've done
internally during our own review process.
--
PITHY WORDS OF WISDOM
Mincing your words is a good thing because you may have to eat them
later.
|
|
|
|
|
|