RE: [xsl] hard core xlt ;-)

Subject: RE: [xsl] hard core xlt ;-)
From: Adam Van Den Hoven <Adam.Hoven@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 09:03:30 -0700
> From: Dylan Walsh [mailto:Dylan.Walsh@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Subject: RE: [xsl] hard core xlt ;-)

> 2. XSLT that generates XSLT. The issue here is that you have two
> namespaces for the XSLT, one for the actual instructions in the
> stylesheet, and one for the XSLT you will be generating. It is not
> always difficult, depending on how much variation there is in 
> the output
> stylesheet. The tricky thing is that you are effectively writing two
> transformations at the same time, each applying to different 
> source XML,
> and you have to think about e.g. which transformation should make a
> given decision.

Just like having server-side script that writes client-side script, this is
most difficult because you have to keep track of what bits of script are
doing their work now or later. I get a headache just thinking about it.

I must say that I've never found a convincing situation where this would be
a preferable solution over using document() to load in additional data, a
number of global params and some well designed and judiciously used named
templates. Not that I'm claiming a wide breadth of experience in situations
that could make use of such a system. 

What would be a good example of a problem that would be best solved in this


 XSL-List info and archive:

Current Thread