[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re:
Re:
Subject: Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns...
From: "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:45:09 +0100 (BST)
Paul Tchistopolskii writes:
> We can, but it will be a piece of paper until
> it is implementend and it is not possible to
> see how good is the concept, until trying
> it in the real life. "Shedule the disaster".
> This has been invented and described
> by Brooks 30 years ago and I don't think
> anything has changed since then.
I don't think we read Brooks as a _manual_ for software engineering...
> <OT>
> This is what drives me crazy. The trivial,
> basic principles of software development
> are ignored by W3C and everybody's
> saying 'this is OK'.
> </OT>
and you don't seem to believe in modelling before coding? you dont
think formal specifications can prove anything?
> Hmm... I think that what I'm doing is explaning
> that that there are some ways other than
> W3C dogmats.
no disagreement there. although the W3C is simply the sum of its
members. I do not see any sign that XSLT was unduly influenced by W3C
staff members
> And I'm questioning some of
> W3C dogmats ( like 'no-side effect' ).
unfair. thats not a W3C dogma. probably more from your hero James
Clark!
> > XSLT is still new
>
> After 5 years of development it is still new?
where does your figure of 5 years come from? if you accept that its
DSSSL, its a lot more; if its XSL, its much less.
> Hm. I may be too cynical, but I think that because
> James Clark has dropped XT there will be no XSLT 2.0
> And I doubt there will even be XSLT 1.1 ;-)
well, I predict the demise of W3C in a couple of years, come to
that. I don't think T B-L's tenuous grasp can hold it together for ever.
> standards. Situation with SQL is that mySQL
> is powering most of the boxes on the planet.
have you mentioned that to Oracle?
> to make the next step. In your universe the
> 'next step' is to pray for XSLT 2.0 to 'fix'
> some craziness
XSLT 2.0 is not coming to come from God. It will come from a working
group, which anyone who cares enough can get themselves on. If my
organisation was not to mean to join W3C, I'd be trying to get on the
XSL FO group, for instance. If I *really* cared, I'd find a way to get
my views felt.
> I again feel I'm
> off-topic generator. This is all frustrating.
have a beer and read Harry Potter. it wil make you feel better
sebastian
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread
- RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., (continued)
- Paulo Gaspar - Mon, 7 Aug 2000 01:43:11 +0200
- Chris Bayes - Mon, 7 Aug 2000 15:05:38 +0100
- Sebastian Rahtz - Sun, 6 Aug 2000 16:49:03 +0100 (BST)
- Paul Tchistopolskii - Sun, 06 Aug 2000 13:50:55 -0700
- Sebastian Rahtz - Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:45:09 +0100 (BST) <=
- Paul Tchistopolskii - Sun, 06 Aug 2000 17:06:47 -0700
- Steve Muench - Sun, 6 Aug 2000 17:31:12 -0700
- Paul Tchistopolskii - Sun, 06 Aug 2000 19:49:39 -0700
- Steve Muench - Mon, 7 Aug 2000 00:23:14 -0700
<- Previous Index Next -> Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paul Tchistopolskii
Thread
Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paul Tchistopolskii
RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Chris Bayes
Date
RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paulo Gaspar
Month
|
Subject: Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns... From: "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 22:45:09 +0100 (BST) |
Paul Tchistopolskii writes: > We can, but it will be a piece of paper until > it is implementend and it is not possible to > see how good is the concept, until trying > it in the real life. "Shedule the disaster". > This has been invented and described > by Brooks 30 years ago and I don't think > anything has changed since then. I don't think we read Brooks as a _manual_ for software engineering... > <OT> > This is what drives me crazy. The trivial, > basic principles of software development > are ignored by W3C and everybody's > saying 'this is OK'. > </OT> and you don't seem to believe in modelling before coding? you dont think formal specifications can prove anything? > Hmm... I think that what I'm doing is explaning > that that there are some ways other than > W3C dogmats. no disagreement there. although the W3C is simply the sum of its members. I do not see any sign that XSLT was unduly influenced by W3C staff members > And I'm questioning some of > W3C dogmats ( like 'no-side effect' ). unfair. thats not a W3C dogma. probably more from your hero James Clark! > > XSLT is still new > > After 5 years of development it is still new? where does your figure of 5 years come from? if you accept that its DSSSL, its a lot more; if its XSL, its much less. > Hm. I may be too cynical, but I think that because > James Clark has dropped XT there will be no XSLT 2.0 > And I doubt there will even be XSLT 1.1 ;-) well, I predict the demise of W3C in a couple of years, come to that. I don't think T B-L's tenuous grasp can hold it together for ever. > standards. Situation with SQL is that mySQL > is powering most of the boxes on the planet. have you mentioned that to Oracle? > to make the next step. In your universe the > 'next step' is to pray for XSLT 2.0 to 'fix' > some craziness XSLT 2.0 is not coming to come from God. It will come from a working group, which anyone who cares enough can get themselves on. If my organisation was not to mean to join W3C, I'd be trying to get on the XSL FO group, for instance. If I *really* cared, I'd find a way to get my views felt. > I again feel I'm > off-topic generator. This is all frustrating. have a beer and read Harry Potter. it wil make you feel better sebastian XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
| Current Thread |
|---|
|
| <- Previous | Index | Next -> |
|---|---|---|
| Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paul Tchistopolskii | Thread | Re: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paul Tchistopolskii |
| RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Chris Bayes | Date | RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paulo Gaspar |
| Month |