Re: Heresy? Re: DSSSL WWW Enhancements

Subject: Re: Heresy? Re: DSSSL WWW Enhancements
From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 09:55:12 +0100 (BST)
 > functional, side-effect free).  Any good programmer realizes that
 > syntax is just a formality.  The best way to learn a new programming
 > language it to understand what it was designed for and how it fulfills
 > that design.  The syntax you pick up along the way (and understand
 > the choice of syntax for the language).
 > The real problem is people's fears of the unknown.  I think what would
 > help more than anything else is good tutorials and examples of using
 > DSSSL.  Since good learning material on DSSSL is still scarce, people
 > will be less likely to adopt it.

hear hear. 100%.

i am all in favour of getting on with DSSSL as it stands, than going
down side paths of dressing it upon other syntax to meet the supposed
concerns of users. everyone on this list is a DSSSL user or believer,
and it seems odd to say `well, i can deal with Lisp but those poor
Perl people cant cope' - give them a chance!

James' summary of things that need adding to DSSSL is a considerably
more pertinent subject to argue about, IMHO. Stuff like whether
smallcaps and dropped caps should be primitives...


 DSSSList info and archive:

Current Thread