On Mon, 2004-06-28 at 16:46, Sebastian Rahtz wrote:
> Peter Flynn wrote:
> >This is a fallacy, I'm afraid. Some users are in organisations which
> >will not permit suitable software to be installed;
> I am puzzled about people who intend to use XML files, but can't install
> software which processes XML.
I don't think most of them consciously want to use XML per se.
It happens to be the format we provide the documents in. They
happen to want to use those documents. If we provided unmarked
undiacritic ASCII, they'd use that. Ditto Word, etc.
A few do indeed want to use the markup for a specific purpose.
Or they want to add extra markup, such as linguistic stuff.
> show me the people in these areas who cannot install a decent operating
> system using less resources on their feeble hardware.
I will ask a colleague from such an area to respond to this.
I know there are still postgrads using 286s and 386s who work
with our documents.
> I bet they pay a tax to Microsoft every year, though. Sorry, I have no
> sympathy. These people should empower themselves with decent free
I'm sure they should.
> an identity transform in XSLT with the output encoding set right.
I haven't had time to dig into XSLT2 yet. This project is only
authorised to occupy a few days support a year.
> just so long as Peter Robinson isn't listening to tell us that XSLT
> is useful for any real jobs :-}
What's he been smoking and can I have some :-)
I have real live customers doing real live work with XSLT.