re: syntax feedback

[Guy_Murphy@xxxxxxxxxx]

YES YES YES!

Sorry, couldn't resist.. chill out :)

To address this emotive post in a more serious vein.

First off, it's been made quite clear that XML/XSL are not meant to replace
HTML/CSS but to coexist, and largely be available for larger scale Web
applications. So for people doing their own Web site on Geocities, in all
likelyhood they'll stick with HTML/CSS, which in many respects is easier
than XML/CSS. So in this light, yes, a lot of people will take one look at
XML/XSL and reject it out of hand.

Personaly I took one look at HTML/CSS a long time ago and rejected, but
I've been stuck with it and will be a little while longer. That doesn't
mean there's anything wrong with HTML/CSS, just that it's not suitable for
the tasks I perfom.

Reading throught the other posts in this thread, I see more comments asking
why we can't just use CSS.

The whole idea of XML is to break the data away from style considerations
once and for all. CSS as it stands can't reorder, which means that you
have to mark-up your XML in the order you want it displayed... oops another
broken model.

XML is not CSS, it's not in competition with CSS, it's not replacing CSS,
it's a different language based on a model that is flexible and can be
extended. The success of this can be seen from similar developments with
XML Query Language developments. Hopefuly at the end of the day we'll have
all the languages we need to do the job all based on a unified model. Not a
confusing mish-mash of languages. Seems to me all we've got to contend with
is / instead of > ...::shrug:: I don't see the problem....And who's bright
ideas was pseudo-classes? Talk about a hack. Did the WG run out of Jolt
Cola or something? Anyhow.

There's an awful lot of developers out there using ASP, PHP, LiveWire or
whatever to transform data into renderable output. Compared the the hoops
jumped through there XSL is a breeze. I suspect that such developers will
take to the XSL pattern matching rather well, as such developers are
normaly used to considering HTML out of order. I feel that it is into this
breach that XSL will best fit.

And trust me, the vast majority of the Web community takes one look at a
large ASP/PHP application and screams with anguish.

XSL isn't supposed to be light and fluffy, and if it wind up light and
fluffy all those databases are going to be ditching their data onto the web
through procedural languages rather than XSL. The "average HTML" programmer
will remain happy with CSS. Please lets not break XSL just so that Geocites
can be full of XSL delivered pages. The Homepage doesn't need XSL. Large
scale Web applications do.

And my own experience here at work still tells me that developers from
rigidly type conventional language background have a hard time wrapping
their heads around XML/XSL. The Web developers seem to take top it very
quickly.

So I repeat... YES YES YES! :P

Cheers
     Guy.





xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on 12/12/98 02:20:29 PM

To:   xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc:    (bcc: Guy Murphy/UK/MAID)
Subject:  re: syntax feedback




Guy Murphy wrote
>I think C++ developers and the like may simply have a paradigm
>shift to undergo when moving to XML/XSL.
...
>Maybe developers comming from the background of rigidly typed languages
...make it up as you go along approach of
>mark-up and styling analagous to Hippy radicalism in the 60s :)
NO NO NO!
Please do NOT turn this into a 'rigid programmer-think' vs 'freewheeling
markup' issue. I am certain that if you put XSL syntax in front of your
average HTML programmer it would equally freak them out.
I think a LOT of people will take one look at XSL and reject it out of hand
as being unreadable. I don't think the XML community can afford the
consequences.
The whole point of XML attractiveness is the freewheeling markup. XSL is
like putting a professor in charge of the soapbox derby.
>The only advice I can give is that you might find it helpful to actualy
>picture the XML mark-up in your head when considering XSL patterns.
The problem with the syntax is the awkward language. The need to reconcile
the XSL patterns to your markup is another issue which we may not be able
to escape.
I'm going to think about this very hard over the next couple of weeks. I
think we'll use a combination of CSS syntax for specifying formatting and
something simpler for pattern matching and layout.
Andy Dent BSc MACS AACM, Software Designer, A.D. Software, Western
Australia
OOFILE - Database, Reports, Graphs, GUI for c++ on Mac, Unix & Windows
PP2MFC - PowerPlant->MFC portability
http://www.highway1.com.au/adsoftware/crossplatform.html
In SF for Macworld Jan 1st-9th 1999, at the AppMaker stand in DevDepot

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list






 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list