RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl

Subject: RE: [xsl] XSLT vs Perl
From: "Michael Kay" <mhk@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 20:41:15 -0000
> I am just asking about advantages of use XSLT 2.0 over many 
> similar tools.

XSLT 1.0 is highly successful. It's the language of choice for people
who want to do XML transformations. You say so yourself.

Yet we all know on this list that XSLT 1.0 has severe limitations. It's
very hard to do grouping, it's hard to do string manipulation, it's hard
to handle dates.

We've provided facilities in 2.0 that greatly ease these problems.

Therefore, if people preferred XSLT 1.0 over other languages when
performing these tasks, despite its shortcomings, they will certainly
prefer XSLT 2.0 over other languages.

Is that a good enough rationale for you? 

OK, I know it probably isn't. You've made your mind up.

Michael Kay

P.S. Renaming functions because someone thinks of a better name is not
what the game is about. It would be totally irresponsible to make
incompatible changes on such a whim, and no-one would thank us for it -
for everyone who liked the new name, there would be two who preferred
the old name, and a hundred who don't care what it's called so long as
it doesn't change. 

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread