Subject: Re: XSLT vs JSP
From: Chuck Robey <chuckr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 21:10:12 -0400 (EDT)
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Paul Prescod wrote:

> Chuck Robey wrote:
> > 
> > XML may have very important uses in the publishing field, depending.
> > Many publishers were hoping that SGML/DSSSL would be a useable common
> > format, but it turned out to be too complicated for editors to encompass
> > ... these folks are not programmers, so DSSSL could not address those
> > people for which it had ben invented.
> I work with publishers alot and I don't know of *any* that consider
> XML/SGML stylesheet development (DSSSL or otherwise) to be the role of an
> *editor*.
> > I think XSL is at the edge of being too complicated, but on the right
> > side at the moment.  Don't let that part grow, add instead things like
> > JSP.
> I think that XSL is well beyond the average end-user's abilities. Yes, it
> is a little easier than DSSSL and a lot easier than Javascript+DOM+XQL
> library. But it still isn't *easy*.

Why is that?  Don't tell me it's the same with all markup, because that
is easily demonstrated to be false.  Don't tell me that it's not needed,
that too is false.

Troff (or groff, actually) is still being used to write books.  That's
too bad, and the reason is that the tools being written are grossly
overengineered for the tasks.  There isn't even any available subset,
which is something that is quite easily doable, without losing any
features for web-authors.

Chuck Robey                 | Interests include any kind of voice or data 
chuckr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx       | communications topic, C programming, and Unix.
213 Lakeside Drive Apt T-1  |
Greenbelt, MD 20770         | I run picnic and jaunt, both FreeBSD-current.
(301) 220-2114              | 

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread