Subject: RE: Someone bashing XSL From: "Didier PH Martin" <martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 18:10:07 -0400 |
Hi Sebastian, Sebastian said: good lord, we have had 15 years of "competition to XSL", in the shape of all the SGML processing systems over the years, and the entire development of DSSSL. what more do you want? XSL is a pretty modest effort at standardizing the best of the last decade into an 80/20 solution. It isn't a big new product trying to bulldoze competitors aside, with hordes of screaming brain-washed acolytes. why do you (and Leventhal, I suppose) portray XSL as the product of a sinister inner circle bent on influencing world history, like something from the plot of a james bond film? hey, I've got an idea? why dont we backtrack 6 months and restart the frenzied argument about the politics of W3C and XSL? Lets have another round of "whats wrong with CSS and DOM" - what joy! Didier says: I have to agree with Simon that competition is good. For my part, this is the quality of the critic toward XSL that xmlscript is lacking. They should at least do their homework. This said, I have to agree that xmlscript has some virtues like XSl hasn't (and vise versa). To answer more particularly to your comment, XSL does not represent necessarily the best of the last decade but more a good compromise of diverse needs. There is obviously room for improvement and some competition will prevent xsl to stay on his laurels. Its only if we have a ghetto attitude that evolution won't happen. Also, about your 15 years of competition in the SGML world and DSSSL is not necessarily competition but precedence to XSL. Always in the same vein, you can say that DSSSL, by competing in the same arena that XSL is pushed to evolve as I whish XSL will be when it will be pushed by a competitor language. Andy Grove said that only the paranoid survive, we can also say that indulgently conduct to death. And please Sebastian, don't count DSSSL as dead, there is room for improvement there too and why not, learn from XSL good features. Do not forget that a DSSSL-2 is possible. As I whish there will be a XSL-2 able to absord the best of its time. So, welcome competition and arguments as long as the quality of them is good and leads to evolution. Isn't it how science evolved? Now what XSL needs is a good competitor and good arguments so that these arguments help it evolve. But not kind of arguments like "it is ugly", or "it is passed" which talks more to my hypothalamus than my gray matter. So, the best thing I can whish to XSL is a strong competitor and good arguments and also a good design team able to absorb the best of its time (on this side I am secured). regards Didier PH Martin mailto:martind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.netfolder.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Someone bashing XSL, Sebastian Rahtz | Thread | RE: Someone bashing XSL, Jonathan Borden |
DocBook XSL Stylesheets V0.09 relea, Norman Walsh | Date | |
Month |