RE: XSLT vs OmniMark

[Linda van den Brink <lvdbrink@xxxxxxx>]

>  having used perl, xsl, and omnimark, I have to say that for
> 
>   markup processing, omnimark is the hands-down winner.
> 
> 
>  I understand that all 3 are not fairly comparable to each other,
> 
>  but since that is the topic of dicussion   -  omnimark was
> 
>  made for markup processing, and it does it very, very well.

I took an Omnimark course last year when I had already used XSLT for a
while. I thought the things Omnimark can do was very impressive as to text
processing, markup processing, and the ways you can combine those
techniques. 

But I was very disappointed to find out that Omnimark's parser doesn't work
with well-formed XML, only valid XML. I needed a tool to transform
well-formed XML so I went back to using XSLT. When I compared the two
languages during the time I was using them both, I felt that XSLT is a
nicer, easier, more intuitive, and more flexible (I'm looking for the right
word here) language to use for precisely the task for which it was built -
transforming XML documents, well-formed or valid. Omnimark can do loads of
other useful stuff very well, though; it's very powerful. 

I don't think it's smart what they write on their homepage about Omnimark
and Perl, but well, whoever expects marketing people to be smart... 

Linda


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