Subject: Re: Updated Benchmark Available From: Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 17:13:53 -0700 |
----- Original Message ----- From: Alexey Gokhberg <alexei@xxxxxxxxxx> > > ... The topic "is XSLT fast enough" is in fact > > very tricky and requires long discussion ... > > > > Sure. > > But I beleive that this has more to do with the implementation, than > with the XSLT specification itself. From some point of view, XSLT could > play for XML the same role as SQL plays for relational data. In > particular, in both cases the sophisticated optimization techniques are > needed to achieve the reasonable performance. I am pretty sure, in the > near future we will see the new generation of optimized XSLT processors. So am I. But I'm also sure that some of those iplementations will not be 100% conformant to XSLT WD. By the way what is SQL ? ;-) I think "100% portable SQL queries" have not too much sense in current world. > Indeed, I am concerned more with the topic "is developing stylesheets > with XSLT fast enough". As I can understand, XSL was concieved as a > declarative language that does not require substantial programming > skills from the stylesheet authors. However, as we could see so far, > implementation of many relatively simple algorithms may require advanced > LISP-like methods. Who knows how much man-hours will be spent for doing > in XSLT things that could be easily done in other languages? and how > many people will experience difficulties mastering XSLT? Yes, there are > few XSLT gurus on the Web, they are glad to help everyone, but is their > summary manpower sufficient to support the industrial use of XSLT across > the world? Sure I agree ( because I was constantly making the same statements myself ). There is not a big number of people who can get pipes, there is not a big number of developers who get functional programming. Some people are saying: "this is issue of education". I doubt ( in fact it *is* issue of education, but not the issue of 'programming education' ) I mean making functional language to be a 'first language' has no serious impact. 7+ years ago I have been involved in some experiments when one class of students (children) got Pascal as a first language when the second class got Logo ( I was used to write part of MIT-logo interpreter ). I came to the conclusion that ability to use concepts of functional programming has nothing to do with the 'programming educaion'. I think masses will use not more than 3-4 constructions of XSLT. But that's not too bad actually. > Please, understand me correctly. I appreciate XSLT technology very much > (having invested a lot in it), but I am really afraid that if the > usability issues will be not successfully resolved, XSLT can die very > soon, despite those bright ideas that form the basis of this technology. XSLT will not die ;-) Well ... not really. I consider XSLT to be a first prototype implementation of some important concepts. Syntax is weird, many useless hacks are in the core e t.c. e t.c. But that's not a big deal. XSLT contains some brilliant inventions - those inventions will not die. For example, I mean the biggest invention of XSLT is that easy combination of 'push-pull' is the way to go. Remove pull from XSLT and we'l get awk / M4. Remove push - we'l get kinda SQL. The next steps will take into account the importance of push-pull combination - this means XSLT will not 'die'. This is in fact a long topic and I'm not sure we should start it now. > ... but whether it is smart or just wise, it got the point - it > attracted much more attention than the ordinary announcement could do. > This is like a street fight - nobody will judge how refined is your > technique, only the final result is important. Hm. Since in the 60-s(?) in the US they invented that it is more profitable to invest $1 into advertizing of beer rather than invest that $1 into quality of beer - thats the way marketing goes. Of course this also explains why there is no good beer in the US. I think those who care about the quality of beer should just ignore those who are concerned about marketing. Some time ago I've wrote a long letter - prediction about the future of XML. My prediction is that at some point those of us who care about the quality of beer will have to start with 'another XML' - like Linux was 'another UNIX'. I think that if you just move your stuff in reasonable direction - you can be sure - at some point those who are making real job will recognize your product no matter how conformat it will be at that point ;-) Of course, as I wrote in my prediction, this is not a good thing when those who care about some XML parts are working 'against' W3C ( like it was not a good thing that Linux started working against FreeBSD project ). It will be of course better if, for example, you and some other people who care about usability of XML-related things will be on WG, or something. But this not gonna happen ever, I think. FreeBSD people were not smart to recognize the possible impact of Linus Torvald. In result we got Linux and FreeBSD when we could get one project ( and one developers base ). But maybe it was *good* we got FreeBSD / Linux. Maybe it will be *good* if we get "W3C alternative". This is the issue of time, I think. How long people will keep waiting for XSL FO ? They'll stop waiting when they'll *really* start using XML ;-) Rgds.Paul. XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: Updated Benchmark Available, Alexey Gokhberg | Thread | Re: Updated Benchmark Available, Alexey Gokhberg |
Re: Updated Benchmark Available, Alexey Gokhberg | Date | [no subject], Raman Rajesh |
Month |