Subject: [xsl] questions about XSLT philosophy: how much is too much? From: "Robert P. J. Day" <rpjday@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 06:53:09 -0500 (EST) |
having read two of the most recent threads -- how to find the largest value less than a threshold, and how to find local extrema -- i'm starting to wonder whether there's a point when someone has the right to say, "no, that's going beyond what XSLT was meant to do." certainly, there are solutions to the above, but at some point, these solutions are starting to look rather unwieldy and makes one wonder whether the right tool is being used for the job. it reminds me of an ad i saw many years ago in a UNIX trade rag -- someone was selling a personal accounting system written entirely in shell script. not surprisingly, the author was a noted shell script expert, so in his mind, scripting was the solution to just about everything. (when the only tool you have is a hammer, etc. etc.) and the evolution of shell scripting is a good example of creeping featurism, IMHO. what started out as a simple automation utility just kept growing, as people who seemed not to understand the proper place for a script demanded more and more features, like arithmetic, arrays, trig functions and so on. speaking from the perspective of a rank newcomer, it's getting a bit overwhelming to see how many different problems people are trying to solve by shoehorning them into an XSLT issue. as an example, consider arithmetic functions. sure, there's floor, ceiling, round and sum. beyond that, if someone wants the maximum of a set of values, i've seen the solution that involves using a predicate to check against all values on the preceding:: axis. so what's next? adding even more math functions? max()? min()? i notice in kay's book the list of exclusively saxon-related extensions, including more math functions, set functions and the like. so i'm curious. what is the eventual goal? it seems that a lot of what XSLT is being used for is starting to push the bounds of what i initially considered stylesheet "transformation", and that XSLT is getting strangely close to being a fully-featured programming language. was that the idea in the first place? (and the introduction in XSLT 1.1 of <xsl:script> suggests that a stylesheet may eventually become little more than a wrapper for a procedural solution.) sorry for waxing philosophical. it's early and the last few postings just got me to thinking. rday XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] Using an index with a sor, Hugh Dixon | Thread | Re: [xsl] questions about XSLT phil, David Carlisle |
Re: [xsl] what does xsl:sort do if , Robert P. J. Day | Date | Re: [xsl] questions about XSLT phil, David Carlisle |
Month |