RE: [xml-dev] Re: XML and Complex Systems (was Re: [xml-dev] Re: An Architecture for Limericks)

Dare sends

"the following article by Tom Moertl is a succint summary of the
issues with XSLT that I've heard developers voice and that I've had myself"

    http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/1/13/223854/606

which summarizes:

"If there is a lesson to be learned, it's that domain-specific language design is hard. The XSLT designers created a language that lacked much of the nuts-and-bolts functionality necessary to make it genuinely suited for its intended purpose. While the designers doubtless left this functionality out of the spec on the grounds that XSLT isn't intended to be a general-purpose programming language, they failed to realize that even simple document transformations often require a little nuts-and-bolts programming. Leaving out the nuts and bolts made XSLT a broken language. 

Lesson: Next time, don't forget the nuts and bolts."

So, is worse better?  Was simple adequate?  Did it matter if XSLT's design was  
top down or bottom up?

len

-----Original Message-----
From: Sean McGrath [mailto:]

>Sean may be reading the same stuff that I am lately! Maybe
>"Emergence: The Connected Lives of Ants, Brains, Cities, and
>Software" Steven Johnson ....

You got it in one:-)