Mixed messages here. His biggest target of criticism is his own Frankenstein's monster of a Java project, but he wants the blame to go to the tools (technologies), and the fact that he wasn't allowed to use Haskell.
You seem to have missed the point. The problem he points out is that in the Java world, it is popular to use a domain specific language like XSLT to handle some tasks and that's an external tool that does not nicely embed into Java. In the Haskell world, domain specific languages are also popular but they tend to be embedded in Haskell, which makes it easier to do the non-domain-specific stuff (like writing the results of the XML transformation to a file). In Java land, many tools can be extended through plugins which can get the same effect but the result is not as easy to follow.
He also has some critisism towards Java the language, but it played a lesser role in the article. Some of the targets of his critique (like the lack of sum types in Java) are also reasons why Java does not have cool embedded domain specific languages like Haskell has.
Though xslt didnt come out of Java, it comes from the w3c mindset of how things should be done. His main criticism is the poor Java XML library, combined with the weakness of xslt, so neither work. Now we all know that most DOM style interfaces are badly designed, tend to think the answer is the Haskell one is an exception.
Everyone else just avoids xml for these types of reason... Obviously you cant for this problem.
