cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [Design] JXTG 2.0 (Just my opinion)
Date Sun, 05 Dec 2004 05:14:15 GMT
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
> Le 4 déc. 04, à 21:03, Glen Ezkovich a écrit :
> 
>>
>> On Dec 4, 2004, at 3:37 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
>>
>>> ...Currently we have JXTG for the first step, and mostly XSLT for the 
>>> second. Having something that could cover both steps and be usable by 
>>> either programmers working on the first step or designers working on 
>>> the second would be a Really Good Thing.
>>
>>
>> I'm not really sure what you mean by having something that could cover 
>> both steps. JXTG covers both steps in the sense that many people are 
>> using it to inject their data into their html.  Now, to have a 
>> template transformer, that is something with which I would really like 
>> to play. I'm not very found of XSL. A simpler alternative could be a 
>> Really, Really Good Thing.
> 
> 
> That's what I mean - having a transformer that can use the same template 
> syntax as used in the generator, so that the template language can be 
> used for both the generation and transformation steps.

My FS detector is out of scale!!

This is *exactly* what the XSLT WG did and failed miserably. XSLT can be 
used for both generation and tranformation. But it looks right for one 
(besides the stupid XML-ish syntax) and totally ackward for the other. 
XQuery is the same thing, only reversed: it can be used as a template 
language, and as a transformation language. If feels better for the 
first one (only ackward because, as usual, the XSLT WG starts with one 
name and ends up defining something else) and totally wrong for the second.

Look at my eyes and repeat with me: I DO NOT WANT TO REPEAT THE MISTAKES 
THAT THE XSTL WG DOES OVER AND OVER YEAR AFTER YEAR.

Generation and transformation are two different things, done often by 
different people and for different goals and with different constaints.

Having one language for both will do only harm, because it will make it 
harder for people to decide when to use generation and when to use 
transformation.

-- 
Stefano.


Mime
View raw message