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

XSL is difficult to...?

Subject: XSL is difficult to...?
From: "Don Park" <donpark@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 1999 17:03:18 -0700

XSL is coming along nicely and I feel that it is time to re-examine the
learnability and readability issues, which are often overlooked when
functionality is the main focus.

Here they are:

1. There are just too many names to remember.

Seemingly, there are zillions of tag names, attribute names, and endless
supply of function names to remember.  To worsen the situation, many of
those names are similar in concept but different in effect (i.e. import vs.
include).  Couldn't some of the tag names and function names be combined
using attributes and function parameters as variations?

2. Unfamiliar use of words.

I am not used to seeing words like 'choose' and 'when' instead of 'switch'
and 'case'.  I keep looking at one thing or another and constantly map the
words into words I am familar with.  Maybe those words are familar to the
authors of the spec but I can't help wishing for more familar words.

3. Verbosity

I feel that XSL is too verbose in terms of names (tags, attributes, and
function names).  Basically, names are too long and hard to remember because
they are composite words such as do-this or apply-something.  I tend to like
short names even if it is not precise.  xsl:apply is clear enough for me
without having to type the remaining '-templates'.

What I basically saying is that XSL doesn't come close to HTML when it comes
to readability and learnability.  HTML is concise and easy to learn.  I
would like to see XSL become more readable and easy to learn.


Don Park

 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list

Current Thread