Michael Kay said:
>> However, I sincerely doubt that you can reject that larger
>> TPC index of PHP or JavaScript over XSLT is an outcome of
>> 'flawed' statistics or 'biased' data.
>
> No, I think we all know intuitively that more people use Javascript or
> PHP than use XSLT, just as we know that there's probably more data in
> Excel than in XML. I just think that publishing one-liners like
> "popularity = 0.069%" as if that actually meant anything is rather
> childish.

Then also Google Trends Lab is childish?

[http://www.google.com/trends?q=XSLT%2C+PHP5&ctab=0&geo=all&date=all]

This indicates decreasing interest for searches for XSLT when compared
with rapid increase on very recent PHP5.

Or maybe does the data mean nothing because the Trend engine is still in
beta?

> We also know from experience that there are a lot of people who find the
> learning curve for XSLT too steep for them, and who give up in
> frustration.

This may be not all of the equation. People was using XSLT for tasks was
not really designed for

[http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/1/15/1562/95011]

> On the other hand, those who get past the learning barriers
> generally like what they find on the other side. It's my hope and belief
> that XSLT 2.0 eliminates many of the obstacles.

And also because XSLT is not all one needs. Can I script in JS an up-down
navigation menu for a website. How could i do that using client side XSLT
(could in XSLT 2)?

> But as long as there are
> people around whose powers of abstraction don't extend to thinking of
> nodes rather than tags, there will always be some people whose cup of
> tea it is not. That doesn't worry me greatly.

After noticing XSLT 2 generates not enough volume for graphics on Google
Trends i would add that your comment remember me lispers explanation on
why LISP is not the favourite PL still.

> Michael Kay
> http://www.saxonica.com/


Juan R.

Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)