Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.0 & XSLT 2.0: Market share/acceptance thereof

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 1.0 & XSLT 2.0: Market share/acceptance thereof
From: Justin Johansson <procode@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 19:12:46 +0900
Thanks for your comments Abel.

At 08:53 AM 18/07/2007 +0200, you wrote:
>Justin Johansson wrote:
>> Do people have any feedback on whether, in their XSLT workplace, they are
>> using XSLT 1.0 or XSLT 2.0 and/or if they have any idea on what the market
>> share of these W3C recommendations currently is and where, in the scheme of
>> things, XSLT 2.0 will go?
>>   
>
>XSLT 2.0 is huge leap forward from XSLT 1.0 (changes are regexes, plain 
>In my own experience, I find XSLT 2.0 very rewarding to work with, 

I could not agree with you more, the gap between the two being similar to
that between BASIC 1.0 and VB.Net.

>But you do not need Microsoft to enable XSLT 2.0 in your applications, 
>of course. Any application nowadays is made up of a bunch of libraries, 
>and it will be easy to add Saxon.NET to your application, which supports 
>XSLT 2.0 fully and completely. Same about Gestalt XSLT, which is built 
>in Eiffel and Eiffel.NET can compile it to a .NET library (didn't test 
>that myself though). Gestalt supports XSLT 2.0, but is not (yet) fully 
>compliant.
>

Yes that is true and if I were to be mandating the design in an XSLT
project then XSLT 2.0 would be it. Period.

However, as unfortunate as it is, it is true that in many organizations,
particularly government and large corporations,  the rather myopic attitude
that
"If is not Microsoft we cannot, and will not, put it in our SOE" persists.
It's really crazy but that's how its been with more than one gov.
department and company in my experience.

So as long as these attitudes continue, managers will still look to see if
Microsoft is doing it before making a commitment to use technology X.

Justin Johansson
Freelance XML / XSLT / XQuery Developer
Australia

procode(at)tpg(dot)com(dot)au

Current Thread