Subject: Re: Infix syntax for DSSSL From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 16:33:25 +0100 (BST) |
The arguments about whether Marc A really is bone-crunchingly stupid or not still seem to me beside the point. Call me old-fashioned, but it seems to me that the best way to sell DSSSL is to demonstrate that it works and does the job. A popular demo is worth a thousand specifications, in the world I live in. If I argue theoretically in this company that we should use DSSSL because its an ISO standard, because its cute, because it looks/doesnt look like Perl, they'll yawn and say `who cares we can do everything in Perl cgibin scripts anyway'. But if I show them fast and elegant solutions to problems that use DSSSL, they'll buy it. Hence I reiterate that James' list of proposals for additions is far more important than mere syntax. But what do I know. I predict Netscape will be a dead company in two years anyway, and to hell with Marc Andreesen. Sebastian DSSSList info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Infix syntax for DSSSL, Paul Prescod | Thread | Re: SGML/XML syntax for DSSSL, Dave Raggett |
Re: SDATA entity mapping, Vivek Agrawala | Date | Is DSSSL Syntax Tricky?, Paul Prescod |
Month |