Re: Which engine? (RE: JavaScript and XSL)

[Paul Tchistopolskii <paul at qub dot com>]

From: Mike Brown <mike@skew.org>


> Paul Tchistopolskii wrote:
> > > Better yet, how do you define 'portable'?
> > 
> > Mike, I already confessed that I give up.
> > [snip]
> > ( and I see that you really understand this magic, when I don't ).
> > [snip]
> > Again - I think you do understand situation really much better than I
> > do.  Because, for example, I'll never push myself learning all the
> > "portability" magic you have learned. 
> 
> Your sarcasm is misdirected. This is a good discussion raising issues for
> the benefit of all -- especially the XSL WG -- to understand that, as
> you've been saying, the meaning and implications of version="foo" in the
> stylesheet are far from clear, given the behavioural differences between
> processors, in practice.

No sarcasm in the statements you've quoted. And maybe in the 
entire thread.  I'm serious. I really give up and I will not try to 
understand the idea of XSLT portability ( which you *do* understand 
from my point of view  - again - no sarcasm here. ). Another place 
which I'll not try to understand is the priority of templates. And also 
I'll not try to understand why mode is not inherited, why document()
addresses relatively to the stylesheet, and a lot of other things.

I simply don't want to waste my time understanding those artificial 
creatures protected by 'legacy', 'careful design' and whatever else 
( but not by engineering, or common sense from *my* point of 
view. I'm also not claming my point of view is better than yours ).

If XSLT is a solution - I want a problem back. 

So now it becomes too hard to dig into answer to *trivial* 
question, like : what does version="1.0" mean ? 

Hell with this tool then. This is not engineering.  
I'm human being and I want easy ways to write the code 
out of my head, not taking into account millions of tricky 
issues. The XSLT tool requires me to take those issues 
into account? Hell with the tool then. It is a bad  tool.  
Very simple. 

Is this a naive view on engineering? Maybe, but this is my 
view which I got with other tools and I'm too old to change 
my view on what is good tool and what is not.

Please don't get me wrong. There is no sarcasm in my words.
First I was surprised you saw the sarcasm. But then I realized 
that we are just from different planets - that's why we are 
speaking different language, so there is no surprise you see 
sarcasm when I was not placing it. You like to  ( and can )
gain the knowledge about XSLT and you find the process 
to be natural.

I find the same process crazy, artificial and not natural at all.

After I realized that - the conclusion I've made was ( I think )
consistent. : "I give up. Your planet is not for me and you 
clearly show that to me".

No sarcasm.

Rgds.Paul.






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