Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT 2 processors|
From: Terence Kearns <info@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2012 07:49:31 +1000
On 11 February 2012 02:44, Wendell Piez <wapiez@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I think much of this is true, yet don't forget that XML and XSLT are still > healthy (very healthy as far as I can tell) in the space for which they were > originally designed, namely publishing systems. > > Some publishing systems are content to stick with a single channel of > output, such as print or the web. And if you're publishing only to the web, > you can maintain your data in HTML and/or an HTML-facing CMS. > > But other publishers can't do this, or they need to insulate themselves, to > whatever extent possible, from technological changes in target media, and > XML/XSLT allow them to do this. Or they need to find efficiencies and > scalability in data interchange and data longevity that they can only get > through a careful separation of concerns across their workflows, which > XML/XSLT allows them to engineer. > > If there's a significant part of the tech marketplace that doesn't even know > this is going on, what does that say other than that the world is a big > place? > Well this is all very true (when I was working as Australian Army webmaster, it was within DoD "publishing systems" where they used SGML and Adobe Frame Maker back in the day). But the introduction of XML Schema saw the implementation of strong data typing which implies the use of XML for data packets AS WELL AS document publishing. The "insulation" used by publishing houses is at least as important to anyone exchanging data - hence all of us [coders]. Personally, I don't see an argument for XML not to be everywhere (at least where protocol overhead isn't super-critical). If it that was half-true [everywhere], then XSLT 2 processors would be ubiquitous. I'm genuinely surprised that Microsoft has dropped the ball on this. They put in a massive effort when they introduced .NET which was after their browser played a pioneering role in the genenis of XSL. Not affording their .NET library XSLT2 is tantermount to sabotaging the progress of XML related development. It just doesn't make sense and is pretty lame IMO.