[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

Re: [xsl] XSLT Hello World

Subject: Re: [xsl] XSLT Hello World
From: Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 01:20:17 +0000

On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:29 AM, David Rudel <fwqhgads@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 12:47 AM, Ihe Onwuka <ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> seminar. I am definitely making that choice over the superior product
>> that demands otherwise and trips me up 99% of the time I try what
>> looks like an obvious option.
> I dispute the underlying assumption that one can meaningfully talk
> about what constitutes an "obvious option."

It's the whole premise of product design. If you got into a car for a
test drive you would have certain expectations about where certain
controls were  and how certain things worked wouldn't you?. There
might be some special features that might  explanation from the

> What constitutes an "obvious option" depends on what your background
> is. Most of Java or C++ doesn't look obvious at all to someone who has
> never worked with OO.

If I got 10 programmers with 10 different backgrounds in a room and
asked them what they thought certain language constructs did - lets
say return() or an if statement, I am pretty sure there would be a
unanimity of expectation.

> Before Java makes much sense, you have to
> understand OO. Before XSLT or Xpath is going to make much sense, you
> have to understand the structure of XML/DOM and think in terms of
> trees, etc.

I don't see why a person who wants to extract 14 December 2014 from

<date>14 December 2014</date>

needs to know anything about a DOM or think in trees.

> And I would claim that once someone is thinking in terms of trees and
> nodes, then the "obvious" things to try work just fine in XSLT/Xpath.

OK. Not a human centric view. How can I illustrate.

How much do I have to know about a car and it's design if I just want
to drive it to work and back?

Current Thread