[4suite] meta xslt

[Martin v. Loewis]

> > > [...] Remodelling XML is what XSLT is designed for, after all.  
> > No, it was not.
> > 
> > Before making claims like this, I think you should read the beginning 
> > of XSLT Recommentadion ( by W3C ) which explicitely says what was 
> > XSLT designed for.
> 
> "XSL Transformations (XSLT): a language for transforming XML documents"
>    -- http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/
> 
> "This specification defines the syntax and semantics of XSLT, which is
> a language for transforming XML documents into other XML documents."
>    -- http://www.w3.org/TR/xslt

I guess the specific sentence that Paul was referring to is a few
sentences later:

# XSLT is not intended as a completely general-purpose XML
# transformation language. Rather it is designed primarily for the
# kinds of transformations that are needed when XSLT is used as part
# of XSL.

It appears that the XSLT authors could not quite figure out what it
was that they had designed: On one hand, it looks like it is a
general-purpose tool on the first glance; on the other hand, the
designers probably where aware of deficiencies so the would not
promise usefulness of XSLT beyond producing xsl:fo elements.

I also agree with Paul that XSLT users appear to go in cycles with
respect to its capabilities and expressiveness: It is generally
useful, it is not, it is, it is not, ... atleast this is how I look at
it. I agree with you that there are more kindful ways of phrasing
one's believes, though.

Regards,
Martin