Subject: Re: [xsl] Off Topic : XSLT Jobs in USA From: davep <davep@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 06:45:48 +0100 |
I have had the experience of being in a company where XSLT2 was *not* allowed. Even with the XSLT1, we were told that the "advanced" techniques should be avoided.. I was like a bit of in shock as in what could be "advanced" in XSLT1 when the whole version is kind of very old now? The reasons given to me were: This is a Microsoft based projects and we don't want XSLT2 here.. The second reason for avoiding the "advanced" techniques ( like keys etc ) in XSLT1 was that, the engineers working in the MS dotNet side, wont understand it.. This was a shame...Instead of educating the engineers, XSLT specialists were asked to underperform in their coding ...This is true with most of the companies where Microsoft is involved as a development platform.. It is OK to get on to Dotnet API for XML and use dot NET file system APIs for file outputs, instead of using for instance xsl:result-document ..
One for posterity. *The code must be comprehensible to procedural (vb, .net c#) programmers. * KISS for the above. * M$ house - no java here please.
The missing item from this list? It's OK to shell out to VB (to do what XSLT can do) which gives the lock in to M$ making it harder to port to XSLT 2.0 Embrace and extend still lives?
-- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] Off Topic : XSLT Jobs in , Mailing Lists Mail | Thread | [xsl] [ANN] XSLT 3.0 testbed, Tony Graham |
Re: [xsl] Off Topic : XSLT Jobs in , Mailing Lists Mail | Date | [xsl] with-param name attribute val, Andre Cusson |
Month |