Re: XSL performance problem

Subject: Re: XSL performance problem
From: Tyler Baker <tyler@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 17:11:01 -0400
Scott_Boag/CAM/Lotus wrote:

> I think it's a bit unfair to be judging XSL performance at this time.  Both
> XT and LotusXSL are documented to be not optimized yet.  There are a LOT of
> things to be done for optimization, and I know both James and myself (and
> other processors like XSL:P) have these optimizations in our plans.  I
> think you'll be pleased at how fast XSL can become.  But right now
> stability and draft supporting features come first.
> Remember how early in the game it is -- XSL is not yet a recommended
> standard, and the last draft brought radical change to the expression
> syntax.
> -scott

Yes it is very early in the game.  I think many XSL developers are still
learning how to balance API ease of use with performance in the XSL engines.  I
think most current XSL processors will likely all go through complete rewrites
from scratch as many of them for now are for the most part hack jobs whose code
is just trying to keep up with the rapid introduction of new XSL drafts.  As
far as what I last saw on the WW3C XSL page, things look relatively stable now
so I would not be surprised if you find that the current crop of XSL Processors
could improve their performance by as much as tenfold in the near future.


P.S. - I am not involved in the XSL technology space anymore for quite some
time so don't take my comments as any sort of advocacy pro or con with XSL,
rather just some observations I have had in retrospect with my dealings with
XSL in the past, all while still subscribed to this high-quality web technology
discussion list.

 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread