Hi Chris,

> As Dimitre does point out (although not particularly clearly in the midst
of
> the rising flames) it is nearly always possible [I think Dimitre usually
> asserts that it *is* always possible] to achieve something in XSLT without
> state that would otherwise in a scripted environment require it.
> Dimitre's reference to XSLT as a functional language is correct but
> unfortunately the solutions are sometimes so esoteric and bloody difficult
> to fathom (nevermind code) that they are usually missed.

Which was exactly my point. I never said that anything was impossible to
accomplish. Just pointed out that sometimes certain tasks are difficult to
accomplish. This is true of any development environment I've ever worked
with. Why choose VB for one task and C++ for another? It's not that
windowing is impossible in C++ or that pointers and callbacks are impossible
with VB. It's just that windowing is more convenient with VB and pointers
and callbacks are more convenient with C++.

The fact that XSL works in a functional, rather than in a procedural manner,
is simply that - a fact. It neither condemns, nor recommends the language.
What it does mean though is that XSL is more suitable to those problems
which can be conveniently solved in a functional manner, and less suitable
to those tasks which cannot be conveniently solved in this manner.

- Joe Geretz -