Subject: RE: [xsl] xslt 2.0 and alternatives? From: "Michael Kay" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 22:03:29 +0100 |
> I've been working with XSLT 2.0, which currently means Saxon. > I wonder > what I ought to be telling people who might be interested in > integrate > processing into a C or C++ project? Mixing components in different languages within the same application has been done many times before and will be done many times again. It's not an ideal answer, because it's always extra work to do the integration, but it's often the only answer there is. Consider implementing the transformation as a web service and invoking it from the client application via HTTP calls. The client need never know that the transformation is done using XSLT, let alone that it's done using an XSLT processor written in Java. > If that isn't a realistic medium-term option, then how to think about > using the work I've done in that sort of environment? The most > significant functionality enabled by 2.0 is the temporary tree stuff > that sorts and enhances my data, and the related multi-level grouping > operations. It's probably always true that if you work hard enough, you can code the transformation in XSLT 1.0 plus vendor extensions where needed. But the work may often be greater than the mixed-language solution. Michael Kay http://www.saxonica.com/
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
[xsl] xslt 2.0 and alternatives?, Bruce D'Arcus | Thread | Re: [xsl] xslt 2.0 and alternatives, Bruce D'Arcus |
[xsl] xslt 2.0 and alternatives?, Bruce D'Arcus | Date | Re: [xsl] links don't work when IE , Anton Triest |
Month |