Hi David,
Thanks for the tip earlier on xml-dev!
David Tolpin wrote:
I just think that XSLT 2.0 is very close to Perl, Python and Ruby,
just not yet as mature. What's the need for one more language in
this family?
I'm not going to argue about the languages etc. The XML syntax is an
advantage. XSLT can be manipulated using XML tools and
that is just wonderfull sometimes.
I guess one can build an XML vocabulary to port Perl (or any other
language, I've done it for ECMAScript) semantics in an XML syntax. But
that would not be a standard now would it ;-)
--
Manos Batsis
_ __ __ __
/ |/ /__ / /____ __ _ ___ _____/ /_
/ / -_) __(_-</ ' Y _ `/ __/ __/
/_/|_/\__/\__/___/_/_/_|_,_/_/ \__/
http://www.netsmart.gr
mailto:mbatsisSPAM_TRAP(_at_)netsmart(_dot_)gr
tel:+302103240940
http://forte.netsmart.gr/foaf/manos_foaf.rdf
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list