Re: What is the best html to latex program on the market or the internet ?

Discussion in 'XML' started by tsy, Oct 29, 2007.

  1. tsy

    tsy Guest

    On Oct 27, 5:06 am, Peter Flynn <> wrote:
    > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 08:21:29 -0700, tsy wrote:
    > > Is XSLT way easier than using a decent scripting language with a SAX
    > > library?

    >
    > Yes. XSLT *is* a decent scripting (well, transformation-to-other-formats)
    > language.

    (I was sure I sent an answer to this, but it does not show up.
    Possibly, I inadvertently pressed "Reply to author" instead of "Reply"
    in Google groups. If so, I beg your pardon.)
    To the best of my knowledge XSLT is at least much more verbose then
    popular scripting languages like Perl or Python. There should be other
    difficulties with it. Would it be easier on average for a randomly
    chosen TeX user to use XSLT or, for example, Lua with SAX library?
    tsy, Oct 29, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Re: What is the best html to latex program on the market or the internet?

    tsy wrote:
    > Would it be easier on average for a randomly
    > chosen TeX user to use XSLT or, for example, Lua with SAX library?


    I haven't used Lua so I can't answer directly, but I strongly suspect
    the answer remains "Depends on exactly what the task is, and depends on
    whether the TeX user has ever worked with rule-driven languages before."

    --
    Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden
    Joseph Kesselman, Oct 29, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Re: What is the best html to latex program on the market or the internet?

    Joseph Kesselman wrote:
    > tsy wrote:
    >> Would it be easier on average for a randomly
    >> chosen TeX user to use XSLT or, for example, Lua with SAX library?

    >
    > I haven't used Lua so I can't answer directly, but I strongly suspect
    > the answer remains "Depends on exactly what the task is, and depends on
    > whether the TeX user has ever worked with rule-driven languages before."


    That's right. Most people expect programming languages
    to be of the procedural kind. They are confused if they
    have to adapt their thinking to a rule-driven language
    like Prolog, AWK or XSLT.
    Juergen Kahrs, Oct 30, 2007
    #3
  4. tsy

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    tsy <> wrote in
    <>:
    > On Oct 27, 5:06 am, Peter Flynn <>
    > wrote:
    >> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 08:21:29 -0700, tsy wrote:
    >> > Is XSLT way easier than using a decent scripting
    >> > language with a SAX library?

    >>
    >> Yes. XSLT *is* a decent scripting (well,
    >> transformation-to-other-formats) language.

    >
    > (I was sure I sent an answer to this, but it does not show
    > up. Possibly, I inadvertently pressed "Reply to author"
    > instead of "Reply" in Google groups. If so, I beg your
    > pardon.)


    Grougle Goops is broken in more ways than I would care to
    mention in a usenet post.

    > To the best of my knowledge XSLT is at least much
    > more verbose then popular scripting languages like Perl or
    > Python.


    And your point is? Yes, it uses XML syntax to represent the
    code tree. No, it's actually quite terse at expressing
    certain classes of transformations.

    > There should be other difficulties with it. Would
    > it be easier on average for a randomly chosen TeX user to
    > use XSLT or, for example, Lua with SAX library?


    As Joseph and Juergen already mentioned, programmers with
    extensive background in imperative programming often have
    trouble adapting to XSLT's declarative/functional paradigm.
    If you're willing to stretch your mind a bit, though, it's
    an eye-opening experience similar to being initiated into
    the mysteries of Haskell, Scheme or Prolog.

    --
    It is rare to find learned men who are clean, do not stink,
    and have a sense of humour. -- Liselotte in a letter to
    Sophie, 30 Jul 1705
    Pavel Lepin, Oct 30, 2007
    #4
  5. Re: What is the best html to latex program on the market or the internet?

    Juergen Kahrs wrote:
    > That's right. Most people expect programming languages
    > to be of the procedural kind. They are confused if they
    > have to adapt their thinking to a rule-driven language
    > like Prolog, AWK or XSLT.


    In my experience most younger programmers (at least those who actually
    have a CS degree) have been introduced to the concept; it's the
    old-timers who haven't kept up with the field and the completely
    self-taught folks who have a bit of trouble initially. And they have
    less trouble if they're actually properly introduced to the ideas rather
    than trying to dive in without even a tutorial.

    But I do grant the point that it's a different approach and folks have
    to be willing to work the way the tool is designed to work. A decade ago
    I saw a pretty darned decent development tool fail to gain traction
    because it was rule-based and the old fossils (ie, the folks about five
    years older than I am...) were having trouble letting go of their
    preconceptions and trusting it. If you haven't worked with rule-based
    systems before, the transition does involve a certain leap of faith
    and/or an understanding of what's being done behind the scenes.

    The expressivity gained is worth it.

    --
    Joe Kesselman / Beware the fury of a patient man. -- John Dryden
    Joseph Kesselman, Oct 30, 2007
    #5
  6. tsy

    Pavel Lepin Guest

    Joseph Kesselman <> wrote in
    <472734e6@kcnews01>:
    > Juergen Kahrs wrote:
    >> That's right. Most people expect programming languages
    >> to be of the procedural kind. They are confused if they
    >> have to adapt their thinking to a rule-driven language
    >> like Prolog, AWK or XSLT.

    >
    > In my experience most younger programmers (at least those
    > who actually have a CS degree) have been introduced to the
    > concept...


    I don't have a degree (dropped out after my first year in
    the university), and I must say that XSLT, which was my
    first close brush with functional programming, was
    absolutely enlightening.

    By the way, a degree in CS does not really imply familiarity
    with programming fundamentals, at least in these here
    parts. All too many universities offer courses
    in 'C++', 'Java', 'SQL' or, god save us, 'Dynamic HTML'
    without touching the big stuff like OOA&D, functional
    programming, computational complexity theory or data
    structures with a ten-foot pole.

    --
    It is rare to find learned men who are clean, do not stink,
    and have a sense of humour. -- Liselotte in a letter to
    Sophie, 30 Jul 1705
    Pavel Lepin, Oct 30, 2007
    #6
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    310
  2. Ramdas
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    276
    Ramdas
    Mar 7, 2007
  3. Replies:
    11
    Views:
    820
    Peter Flynn
    Oct 27, 2007
  4. Replies:
    6
    Views:
    319
    Peter Flynn
    Oct 27, 2007
  5. tsy
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    375
    Peter Flynn
    Oct 28, 2007
Loading...

Share This Page