Re: Updated Benchmark Available

[Paul Tchistopolskii <paul@xxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Alexey Gokhberg <alexei@xxxxxxxxxx>

> > 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 who does really "work against W3C"? Many people just try to
> implement and promote their own ideas and/or provide their customers
> with the best possible solutions. They cannot wait until W3C will
> provide all necessary technologies

1. When saying that they work 'against' W3C, I'm quoting the word 'against' 
on purpose. This is actually tricky. I think that rapid activity with SQL 
implementations has killed the SQL. I mean I think it could be be possible 
to get better SQL if not vendors who was rapidly implementing  SQL 
with 'extensions'. ;-)

2. Sometimes you can not live with extension mechanizm provided
by W3C, but you need some core changes. XSL FO is the example.
You can not solve all the possible problems with the 'conformant' 
extensions mechanizm. Another example. At the moment I can call my 
XSLScript a "syntax sugar around XSLT",  but I could change the Xpath
model dramaticaly - and what to do after that? The border between 
'implementation with extensions' and  'some variation on top of 
W3C paper' is not easy to draw. Recently, I've switched from XT 
to SAXON only because of saxon:evaluate extension. ( See - 
this has nothing to do with W3C specs at all ).

I don't know actually. Maybe you're right and this is all the 
issue of wording. Let us consider that anybody who 
writes some product which is somehow related to some 
W3C paper is in fact working 'for' W3C  ;-) Something tells me 
that this is not completely true, but this is very subtile thing. 
Right now I can not explain this even to myself. ;-)

> And who said that all XML-related
> developments must be blessed by W3C? That anyone who likes to contribute
> must participate in WG? It should not be a crime to think differently
> than W3C thinks.

I don't know. I just know that when Linus Torvald tried to contribute to FreeBSD, 
he has been rejected and decided that it will be easier for him to implement 
Linux rather than spend his time arguing with FreeBSD elite. 
That's the way it usually happens. 

I'm not saying is something a crime or not, but I'm sure that few smart 
people can produce some useful set of formatting objects *much* faster 
than it takes W3C to do that. I'm sure that 'alternative XSL FO' will 
gonna happen *anyway*, no matter what will be the progress 
in XSL FO WG. Time will expalin why  I'm making this statement.

Of course, it could be possible that XSL FO WG will suddenly change 
the style they are making things e t.c. But the probability of such a 
change equals to the probability that FreeBSD elite will change their 
style after some student hanging around their mailing list.

The last but not the least.  I'm *not* saying that the style of FreeBSD team
or the style of XSL FO WG is in any way bad style. I'm also not saying 
that the style of Linus Torvald was 'better'.  It just sometimes happens 
that people need different  things. 

I think W3C elite does not care about the usability of solutions they 
provide, but W3C elite cares about the 'elegancy'.

I think, only sadist should expect people enjoying writing : 
<xsl:call-template constructions and writing simple 'else' in 
form of  <xsl:when

In fact XSLT is a mess of tree layers in one. Syntax, 
Semantics and VM are mixed. There are actually many
problems with XSLT if trying to turn it into universal thing
For it's own declared problem domain -  XSLT is of 
course OK. The problem is that the domain itself is 
obviosly too self-limiting.

You may see that more and more naive XML users are 
saying : "XSL is a tool to convert documents between 
2 different XML schemas". O how naive they are!!! ;-) 

XSLT is a part of XSL which is a framework for rendering 
documents into print media.

Right?
Wrong?
Will be changed?

I occasionaly asked on this list "will problem domain of XSLT 
get changed?" Of course, I haven't got any answer, because
it is against W3C policy  to tell anything important to 
the users of their solutions. 
 
Being sick of such things, some new Linus Torvald will 
come and start his own game. The niche is so huge - 
that's obvious this will happen earlier of later.

Will that work 'for' W3C or 'against'? I don't know.

I just see that Linux of  XML is closer with every day.
No matter how big is the company - it  can 
not spit on developers for a long time. Very simple.


> > But  maybe it was *good* we got FreeBSD / Linux.
> > Maybe it will be *good* if we get "W3C alternative".
> > 
> 
> Too early, at my opinion ...

Sure, it is early. But it comes there faster than I thought. 
W3C could afford to be slow on XSL FO, but not on some 
other things, and too many things are now hanging. Maybe 
now it all depends on availability of some student, because 
students have plenty of time ;-)

When 1 year ago I was making that prediction there was not too 
many teams / products that could become the base for Linux of XML.
Now situation is different and I think some loyal W3C members  
are sometimes questioning themselvs - is waiting for some paper 
which could be produced in, say, 2 weeks, for more than one year 
really acceptable ? ;-)

Let us check what'l be up after one more year.  ;-)  With Linux you 
always have plenty of time ahead, because nobody thinks it is 
possible. Until you ship the version 1. ;-)

For Linux 4 XML to appear we need to get a diversity of working 
XML tools first. This will take a while, I think. 

Where is my *good* XML diff ???? ;-) 

Rgds.Paul.

> Hmm ... I think, I'm not convinced. A good teacher will have success
> teaching any technologies. 

This is a fundamental problem. And I'l say "I think your statement 
is not correct, even nobody ( me included ) can judge on this".

As some ( chineese? ) man said : "teacher can not teach
students, but only teachers". 



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