I think we're getting ahead of ourselves a little here by saying "XSLT vs. X#".
For one thing, the suggestion that X# will be a functional language is pure
conjecture. Microsoft has developed a huge object model library and I think it
is possible that X# will leverage that library into escapsulated objects that
will simply make accessing XML nodes as objects much easier. Or, maybe they've
decided they like the notion of XSP
(http://xml.apache.org/cocoon/userdocs/xsp/index.html) and are developing
something along those lines. Of course, it's possible it may be a functional
language after all, but who really knows, other than some people in Redmond?
For another thing, X# is still just vapor ware (vapor#?). It may become a
language, and it may not.
Also, I think there are folks on this list who will challenge the notion that
XSLT is limited, or even that hard to use.
Chuck White
Author, Mastering XSLT, Sybex Books
http://www.javertising.com/webtech
http://www.tumeric.net
----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Wonsil
Sent: 1/13/2003 10:46:43 AM
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: [xsl] XLST vs. X#
There are some stories popping up that Microsoft will introduce a functional
programming language to process XML and called it X# (X-Sharp). It may be
of interest to some in this group. For some info:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,808302,00.asp
The final quote comes from a person with an ironic name:
"Is there a need for this?" asked Mike Sax, CEO of Sax Software Inc., of
Eugene, Ore. "The only XML 'language' we have today is XSLT [Extensible
Stylesheet Language Transformations], which was originally conceived as a
way to transform XML data into presentation-centric HTML. Although XSLT is
fairly widely used, its power is limited, and it is fairly hard to use."
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list