Lists Home |
Date Index |
Dave Pawson wrote:
>> The way I see things, in a first phase most people just won't use the
>> typing features of XSLT 2.0 and just use it as a better XSLT 1.0.
> Without the type stuff, its little better than 1.0
I'll move to XSLT 2.0 any day just to use it as a better XSLT 1.0, so
I obviously don't agree. But that's just me. BTW that's not saying
XSLT 2.0 could not be better.
>> Regarding the difficulties, I agree, but it's in general easier to
>> teach a language that is well-designed rather than one that is not.
> Which is why 1.0 succeeded?
Only kind of. I wish XSLT adoption was more widespread. XSLT 1.0's
quirks have definitely not made its adoption easier.