Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

Oops Article

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

8 messages Options

tblanchard

Oops Article

It doesn't. He is of the "documents everywhere" mindset that is enamored of xsl and views the world as streams and transformations.

He also applied for a job here and then stood me up for his interview. Can't say I take him very seriously.

On Monday, March 13, 2006, at 09:47AM, Brad Fuller <[hidden email]> wrote:

>I wonder if this needs some replies by more experienced language-experts
>than myself:
>
>http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/9246
>

Brad Fuller

Re: Oops Article

Todd Blanchard wrote:

It doesn't.  He is of the "documents everywhere" mindset that is enamored of xsl and views the world as streams and transformations.

He also applied for a job here and then stood me up for his interview.  Can't say I take him very seriously.

Thanks Tom. Where is "here"?

 
On Monday, March 13, 2006, at 09:47AM, Brad Fuller [hidden email] wrote:

I wonder if this needs some replies by more experienced language-experts
than myself:

http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/9246

Michael Haupt-3

Re: Oops Article

In reply to this post by tblanchard

Hi,

On 3/13/06, Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It doesn't. He is of the "documents everywhere" mindset that is enamored of xsl and views the world as streams and transformations.

I had the same impression.

At one point, the author claimed that XML was the next due
abstraction. At that moment, the text looked as if it tried to suggest
that all future programming would be done in XML. I wonder where that
may lead, what with XML not being a programming language and with no
"good" languages available for processing it.

Maybe I have missed a point in the article, but I haven't found the
spot where the author actually states what languages are, in his
opinion, the ones available for processing documents and streams. That
is, which languages express the transformations?

> He also applied for a job here and then stood me up for his interview. Can't say I take him very seriously.

Ah, no offence intended, but I'd rather not go personal on him.

All the best,

Michael :-)

Blake-5

Re: Oops Article

> At one point, the author claimed that XML was the next due
> abstraction. At that moment, the text looked as if it tried to suggest
> that all future programming would be done in XML. I wonder where that
> may lead, what with XML not being a programming language and with no
> "good" languages available for processing it.

Anyone tried OpenLaszlo?

Brad Fuller

Re: Oops Article

Blake wrote:
>> At one point, the author claimed that XML was the next due
>> abstraction. At that moment, the text looked as if it tried to suggest
>> that all future programming would be done in XML. I wonder where that
>> may lead, what with XML not being a programming language and with no
>> "good" languages available for processing it.
>
> Anyone tried OpenLaszlo?
I've only looked at it from afar. And, only because pandora uses it:
www.pandora.com

Michael Haupt-3

Re: Oops Article

In reply to this post by Blake-5

Hi,

On 3/14/06, Blake <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Anyone tried OpenLaszlo?

not me, at least. :-) Thanks for the pointer, that looks really
interesting. In the scope of this thread, the only response, however,
could be "double gasp".

All the best,

Michael

Torsten Sadowski-2

Re: Oops Article

In reply to this post by Michael Haupt-3

Hi,

XML seemed to me just to be a way to add object orientation to documents
to make the document better accessible from (often) object oriented
software.

Torsten

On Tue, 14 Mar 2006, Michael Haupt wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 3/13/06, Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > It doesn't. He is of the "documents everywhere" mindset that is enamored of xsl and views the world as streams and transformations.
>
> I had the same impression.
>
> At one point, the author claimed that XML was the next due
> abstraction. At that moment, the text looked as if it tried to suggest
> that all future programming would be done in XML. I wonder where that
> may lead, what with XML not being a programming language and with no
> "good" languages available for processing it.
>
> Maybe I have missed a point in the article, but I haven't found the
> spot where the author actually states what languages are, in his
> opinion, the ones available for processing documents and streams. That
> is, which languages express the transformations?
>
> > He also applied for a job here and then stood me up for his interview. Can't say I take him very seriously.
>
> Ah, no offence intended, but I'd rather not go personal on him.
>
> All the best,
>
> Michael :-)
>
>
>

Bob Courchaine

Re: Oops Article

In reply to this post by Blake-5

Blake wrote:
>> At one point, the author claimed that XML was the next due
>> abstraction. At that moment, the text looked as if it tried to suggest
>> that all future programming would be done in XML. I wonder where that
>> may lead, what with XML not being a programming language and with no
>> "good" languages available for processing it.
>
>
> Anyone tried OpenLaszlo?

How about Orbeon Presentation Server from the ObjectWeb folks?

http://www.orbeon.com/