Re: [xsl] return of the XSL FAQ

["Michael Müller-Hillebrand mmh@xxxxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> But i'm leaning towards keeping the
> existing 1.0/2.0 FAQ unchanged (except e.g. if there are broken links
> etc) and starting a new one that incorporates XSLT 3 and current work
> and implementations. The new one, as per Dmitre and Wendell, could use
> parts of the old one, given any necessary permission, to build on the
> work done before that was so useful.

Hi,

As far as I remember many patterns which were recommended with XSLT1 have
changed with XSLT2. The changes may be less obvious with XSLT3, but I would
really like to see any old content linked to newer versions of the same
problem. The uses cases are basically the same over the years (apart from five
levels of for-each-group), but the technology advanced.

The main benefit of a human-edited FAQ is the order it brings to the content.
Trying to find good topic titles and preparing samples so they are of general
interest is a major part when preparing FAQ content. It must be different from
a simple google/slashdot/b& search to succeed. If it also educates readers
regarding more modern patterns, the better.

IMO, keeping the history unchanged for archival reasons is the job of
archive.org.

I also hope that it will be easy for us, the community to contribute.

- Michael, who was missing the FAQ every other month, or so