[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
XSL history (was RE: [xsl] XSL Sites)
Subject: XSL history (was RE: [xsl] XSL Sites) From: Matt Gushee <mgushee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 31 May 2001 10:29:13 -0600 (MDT) |
Wendell Piez writes: > I thought Matt's potted history was excellent, except for one detail ... I > think it arguable that the split of XSLT from XSL proper was motivated > primarily by the MS implementation. That was a big part of it, but as you > remember MS's was not the only implementation of early drafts. (There was > also XT and one or two others in Java, plus that interesting package > InDelv, etc. etc.) The whole community was discovering how useful the > transformation part was even without the FOs (targetting HTML). A number of > early adopters were quite outspoken on this issue, on XSL-List, sometimes > with lengthy arguments. Check out the list archive. Good point. I was slightly aware of this, but wanted to keep it simple (I think it's 'cuz I hate sounding too academic ... just a personal thing). > (FWIW, much as we bang on Microsoft for their apparently predatory > marketplace tactics, the history shows that technically, at least, XSL owes > quite a bit to their investment.) > > In any case, I think Matt's account might be tempered a wee bit (as you say > on that side of the pond). As in, toning down the 'big bad Microsoft' stuff? That was tongue-in-cheek; although I'm no fan of MS, I'm happy to give them credit for their excellent XML tools. Matt Gushee Englewood, CO, USA XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
XSL history (was RE: [xsl] XSL Site, Wendell Piez | Thread | [xsl] Re: Move a section in XSL, Jeni Tennison |
Re: [xsl] Calling templates with (d, RSuiter | Date | Re: [xsl] excluding xml elements/co, Oliver Becker |
Month |