Subject: Re: how does it fit in with the web From: David Carlisle <davidc@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Wed, 1 Sep 1999 14:12:55 +0100 (BST) |
I am very new to XSL and XML and don't quite understand how it fits in with the web? Is it intended that 1. an XSL processor sits on the server end, and generates html files? Or 2. the web browser has an XSL processor, and so it downloads the XML file and corresponding XSL style sheet and generates the html itself? Either of those. Whether the transformation is better to happen on the server or the client depends on what it is. Doing client side transformations means that the client has access to the original markup which might be useful (so save-as, or view-source show the original document, not the form transformed for presentation) but if the original document is 1000Gb of database and the transformation is pulling out one page of HTML, it may be better to do the transformation on the server and so just send one page down the wire. Of course currently the usual situation is the web browser isn't XSL aware (or at least isn't aware of the current draft) so server side transformation is currently more common. In either case you don't _have_ to transform to html. If your browser is css aware you can transform to any XML together with presentation specified by css, and hopefully one day browsers will natively understand the XML markup that describes `XSL formatting objects' in which case you could transform to them. Does anyone know of any perl implementations of an XSL processor? No (well someone might, but I don't). Java seems to be the language of choice for XSL developers Sam David XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
how does it fit in with the web, Sam.Walker | Thread | RE: how does it fit in with the web, Linda van den Brink |
RE: old XSL -> New XSL, DPawson | Date | RE: how does it fit in with the web, Linda van den Brink |
Month |