Subject: [xsl] Review of Dimitre Novatchev's XSLT Pluralsight training From: "Michael Friedman sumarimike@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:28:30 -0000 |
Id like to take a moment to review and promote Dimitre Novatchevs XSLT 3.0, 2.0 and 1.0 training courses on Pluralsight. I had the opportunity to take the XSLT 1 and 2 courses this year and expect to get into 3.0 soon. I believe I need to describe my own level or experience with XSLT and XPath to frame the perspective which I offer my thoughts. I am self-taught, in the field, some terror and flames involved as I learned all this for a project I was working on in 2001. I also worked in a system called Xyvision which used a rudimentary form of XML/XSLT in the early and mid-1990s. I've never had formal training. One of the early keys to my success was using Oxygen in debug mode to watch how the processor consumed the XML and processed the stylesheet. That showed me more than anything how this technology worked. Doing that was my first "awakening" moment for this process. I believe for the XSLT/FO community there are, generally speaking, three types of XSLT users. Those who were and are part of the design of XSLT/XPath, people who are clear experts. A second subset appear to approach XSLT somewhat programmatically. That is, they have a programming background or programming experience. The last set are "other" users. These can be people just trying to solve a problem or are at the very beginning in the process of learning XSLT/XPath. In my case, I fall strangely into the Other category, with one more twist. I approach XSLT/XPath almost solely from a publishing perspective. I've often been involved in projects to turn paper into digital content, and my focus is on XSLFO and HTML, and through that XSLT and XPath. So, I would say that, in relation to my peers, my experience is "Advanced". All this is to say that at my level of "Advanced" I was able to understand the training offered in the XSLT 1 and XSLT 2 courses. I think the skill rating for these courses of "intermediate" on difficulty is apt. There are things I did not know but was able to visualize and understand in concept. I had many "aha!!" moments that put the pieces of the puzzle together for me. For beginners, and people new to XSLT, I think the training would be more difficult (though still useful) because of the level of abstraction and partly because beginners would need more examples to make up for a lack of experience. So to really begin my review of the XSLT 1 & 2 materials, I have this to say: 1. This is the first time I felt like I was receiving proper training by a professional. 2. My own experience in XSLFO/XSLT/XPath was VERY beneficial in understanding the material and putting it in the right context. 3. A strong benefit of the training was Dimitres provision of a common vocabulary. I did not know the terms "atomic" and "sequence constructors" for example, but it made perfect sense, and now I can refer to these things correctly. 4. There were certain instances, particularly in XSLT 2.0 where I wanted to try examples out on my own. I could visualize the situation, but not entirely and needed to work through a cause and effect. I had to pause the training frequently to see if I could understand the concept, it's application, and then some of the implication. I like that he ran several concepts into one big example, but in some cases wanted just one example to focus on. 5. I was particularly interested in the details of functions. Not being a programmer, but starting to learn more programming, this is a foreign but very useful concept. 6. Not surprisingly, I had some trouble with the programmer-oriented references, such as regular expressions. I've worked with these before, but am not overly familiar with the nuance, which experts would be. I need to get better! 7. The fragmenting and organization of the topics was very thorough, precise, and made a lot of sense. The structure of the training materials taught some things also. 8. I took a lot of notes, primarily over items I did not know. Examples: Default template handling, removing all non-normalized spacing (this is something I struggle with a lot), top-level elements, tunneling parameters, encoding for uri, codepoints, and normalization. As an "advanced" user with a beginning level of training, I felt like the coursework was very appropriate for taking me to the "next level" whatever that means for opening up the way I could write better code and solve problems more effectively. I think the XSLT 3 prep will be more complicated because it's farther removed from my experience. I kept thinking I would love to sit down and discuss work I have done, do a code review, and see how I could have been more efficient. I immediately wanted to rewrite a certain bit of code I've worked on the past year. I think when one starts out as a programmer, you think somewhat linearly (or I did at least), and so I wrote my code in this linear fashion trying to solve the problem linearly. But, with training, and as you get better you see how you can do things in a more complex-appearing way that is actually simpler if you can put that much together and have confidence in its result. I've heard many people exclaim that learning on your own or working in the field is the best experience for learning. But, I think it only goes so far, and was very grateful to learn from Dimitres training materials. Im always grateful from interaction with the XSLT gurus and list at Mulberry Tech. Kind regards,Michael Friedman
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] XSLT 3.0 Candidate Recomm, Martin Honnen martin | Thread | Re: [xsl] Review of Dimitre Novatch, Dimitre Novatchev dn |
Re: [xsl] XSLT 3.0 Candidate Recomm, Dimitre Novatchev dn | Date | Re: [xsl] XSLT 3.0 Candidate Recomm, Wendell Piez wapiez@ |
Month |