[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home]
[By Thread]
[By Date]
Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor are People using for XSL stylesheet coding
Subject: Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor are People using for XSL stylesheet coding From: "Michele R Combs mrrothen@xxxxxxx" <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 18:23:21 -0000 |
bunmanageably monstrous stylesheetsb lol Too trueb& From: Ihe Onwuka ihe.onwuka@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Friday, November 07, 2014 1:16 PM To: xsl-list Subject: Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor are People using for XSL stylesheet coding My elders and betters will correct me if I am wrong but the gold standard for an xml editor seems to be oxygen. Let me out myself as a heretic here on the grounds that my personal bias tend towards minimalism but I do have what I think is an objective observation to make because even if I were a paid up believer that IDE's are all good I have (on multiple occasions) observed a double edged sword. Editors that have debugger's (i.e not just oxygen) enable people who are asked to write XSLT despite not being familiar with the language (the intersection of those sets is very large) to create unmanageably monstrous stylesheets whose maintenance and update is totally reliant on the availability of the debugger. Whether that is a cuss or comp is for the reader to decide but since this is my post I will eschew any such diffidence. Now I understand such is not necessarily the exclusive preserve of XSLT but given that we are talking about a non-sequential declarative language the word that first sprung to my mind in relation to this state of affairs was insidious. I don't know the half of the capabilities of the tool, I am sure there are good reasons why it is the gold standard and in fact this observation is not about oxygen specifically. But what I am saying is that without debugging facilities these stylesheet monstrosities could never be created and (one would like to think) their creators may weel be be forced into better software engineering practices. I'm not even going to try and weigh that against the good things these tools are said to facilitate but I think it is an observation worth making. Call it an unintended consequence of the technology. On Fri, Nov 7, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Catherine Wilbur cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxx> <xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:xsl-list-service@xxxxxxxxxxxx rytech.com>> wrote: What PC WIndows editor are people using for their XSL stylesheet coding? I am currently using editx - xmleditor (freeware version) Are there some better ones out there that we could be using? _____________________________________________________________________ Catherine Wilbur cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxx<mailto:cwilbur@xxxxxxxxxxx> XSL-List info and archive<http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list> EasyUnsubscribe<-list/1005724> (by email) XSL-List info and archive<http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list> EasyUnsubscribe<-list/1127818> (by email<>)
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor ar, Ihe Onwuka ihe.onwuk | Thread | Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor ar, Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Re: [xsl] What PC Windows editor ar, Ihe Onwuka ihe.onwuk | Date | Re: [xsl] For CSV output file - sho, Michael Kay mike@xxx |
Month |
Keywords