Subject: RE: [xsl] :o) (Re: qualitative decline of xsl-list questions) From: Américo Albuquerque <aalbuquerque@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 11:13:54 -0000 |
Hi. In this case I think we could talk about "qualitative decline (or not) of xml software". On several posts I've read somebody (I think was David Carlise, but I'm not sure) saying that we have to change the way we think XSLT. That C programmers, VB programmers, and alike, should try to think in a functional way instead of a programatical one. The problem is that we find our selves having to think in both ways, one to create the objects that we'll have to use, and the other so we can use stylesheets to there full power. This mix of languages sometimes get confusing. When we're using DOM, we are in the world of C, VB, Java, etc, that has there one rules and syntax, when we use XSLT, we use the syntax defined by the parser that we choose to work but we still are in the world of those languages, unless we let the browsers do the tranformation for us. Since I join this list, I've been using XSLT to do the most of the job, leaving to VB the task of creating the objects and showing the result. And even when I had to use the DOM, I usualy defined it to use Xpath language so it could be similar to the XSLT (use selectSingleNode or selectNodes instead of templates but the way of work was the same). -----Original Message----- From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Dimitre Novatchev Sent: sexta-feira, 6 de Dezembro de 2002 19:19 To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [xsl] :o) (Re: qualitative decline of xsl-list questions) As seen in microsoft.public.xml ... :o) --------------------------------------------------------- From: RD Date: Friday, 6 December 2002 6:44 PM Newsgroups: microsoft.public.xml Subject: Fed up with MSXML This hole XML DOM s**t is overly complex. It has tens and tens of methods and properties. and what are all these interfaces and objects for? this sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks sucks. And yes, I know what i'm talking about. I have spent the last month developping an application using VBScript and MSXML. And I now believe VBScript + MSXML is the most s**tty compination you can get. I ended up working directly on the text stream by using regular expressions (wich happen to lack some features in VBScript, like lookbehinds) instead of parsing it. Here are some example <one> hello <two> blahblah </two> world </one> i could not manage to extract "hello world". I kept getting "hello blahblah world" (using oXmlNode.text). <text> the quick red (1) fox jumped</text> I want to replace (1) by <ref id="1">. Haven't found a reasonably simple way to perform this with the DOM, and used regular expressions on the text file instead. And all this XPath babble about axes and functions and ... is this the Microsoft documentation or is this thing as complex as it seams? This is pure masoshism in my opinion. XML should be simple. Next time I write my own parser. __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: [xsl] :o) (Re: qualitative decl, bryan | Thread | RE: [xsl] :o) (Re: qualitative decl, Chuck White |
RE: [xsl] Dynamically Creating XSL , "Braumüller, Hans" | Date | RE: [xsl] conflict resoltion for te, Andrew Welch |
Month |