Subject: Re: Is DSSSL-O dead? From: "Frank Boumphrey" <bckman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 1998 14:15:29 -0800 |
>>As for the DTD issue, I >urge you to reconsider. To me the SDQL side of DSSSL is of equal if not >greater importance than the style side; for this the DTD is essential. >I've also never understood why the DTD is a problem.) << I agree, however DSSSL-O is for use with XML, and sometimes (usually) there will be no DTD present, so DSSSL-O must just work with a well formed document. >>Would you consider >throwing together a memo based on what you found in your course for >contribution to the DSSSL doco project?<< Absolutely, if I can be of any help just let me know. However, I am very far from being a DSSSL guru, I just learnt enough to teach it!! (Now doesn't that scare you!!, if you can, do it, if you can't etc..). Paul in another posting said: "DSSSL is not that hard, but the syntax frightens people and will always do so. Real, honest-to-goodness-I-went-to-university-for-four-years computer programmers are still scared of fully parenthesized prefix syntax. I don't think that end-users will ever accept it." and I think the relevant phrase is "Real, honest-to-goodness-I-went-to-university-for-four-years computer programmers ", because they "know" how things are meant to be done, and when they come across a contrary idea, they take fright. My students were all newbies (and some of only average intelligence), but they had no problem with the concept of a "fully parenthesized prefix syntax" because they hadn't yet learnt it was "wrong". Frank -----Original Message----- From: Reynolds, Gregg <greynolds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> To: 'xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' <xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Cc: 'dssslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx' <dssslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Friday, March 27, 1998 10:03 AM Subject: RE: Is DSSSL-O dead? >Bravo, Frank. The problem of DSSSL has always been the lack of good >clear prose, not the alleged difficulty of the language itself. I >personally have never been able to fathom the "we need to simplify >DSSSL" argument; in fact DSSSL, like scheme, is a model of simplicity >and clarity. The subject matter it addresses may be complex, but DSSSL >goes a long way to alleviate the complexity; "simplifying" DSSSL will >not simplify the problem domain. On the other hand, "we need to improve >the way DSSSL is presented and taught" is a no-brainer. It is indeed >quite hard to learn just from the standard text and scattered samples on >the net; but once you've learned it you'll never want to go back. > >One cavil: I think Jade (with emacs) is very well suited for >experimentation, but it needs to be packaged appropriately with the >right supporting materials (I'm working on it). As for the DTD issue, I >urge you to reconsider. To me the SDQL side of DSSSL is of equal if not >greater importance than the style side; for this the DTD is essential. >I've also never understood why the DTD is a problem.) This is an >indirect way of stressing that SGML is the foundation of the whole >thing. For pedagogical purposes (with to SDQL), I should think the >ability to invent ad hoc document grammars and experiment with >conforming instances would be very useful; it certainly is for me in my >DSSSL explorations. > >FWIW, I'm trying to follow Mies' advice "don't talk, build"; so sometime >Real Soon Now I hope to finish some basic intros into various DSSSL >subjects that I work on when I find the odd hour. Would you consider >throwing together a memo based on what you found in your course for >contribution to the DSSSL doco project? > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Frank Boumphrey [SMTP:bckman@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] >> > ... > >> DSSSL is an incredibly powerful language, in fact all the other >> languages evince a "I want to be like Mike" attitude (for non US >> readers >> this refers to a Nike Ad starring Michael Jordan), and I for one would >> hate >> to see it relegated again to the marginalia of document authoring. >> >> It strikes me that all the perceived problems are eminently >> "fixable" >> > > > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list > XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Is DSSSL-O dead?, Henry S. Thompson | Thread | Do not cross-post to the DSSSList, XSL-List Owner |
Do not cross-post to the DSSSList, XSL-List Owner | Date | Re: Is DSSSL-O dead?, Brad McCormick, Ed.D |
Month |