Re: [xsl] xsl transformations on the client or server for NS6+

[Rob Rohan <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 23:19, jim wrote:
> Hello everyone,
> 
> Sorry if this question seems basic, but I have two important clients who
> need to support Netscape site visitors. I've been plugging away at this for
> hours reading up on client-side XSL Transformations versus server-side XSL
> Transformations. One article provided me with a JavaScript that it says
> works in IE 6+ and NS 6+/Mozilla 1.2+ at
> http://www.ebargoon.ca/sell/ebhtml.asp but it didn't work for me on
> Netscape.  I even upgraded to Netscape 7.1 just to triple-check  but no such
> luck. I've been reading up on "JavaScript/XSLT Bindings" at
> http://devedge.netscape.com/viewsource/2003/xslt-js/ and did a
> hack-and-paste job of using the bits of JavaScript they provide, but no luck
> on Netscape. My servers don't support ASP so what can I do?  There was a
> somewhat related thread posted in 1999 at
> http://www.biglist.com/lists/xsl-list/archives/199910/msg00626.html with two
> opposing viewpoints, and I'm hoping that in 2003, there's a copy-and-paste
> solution for me either in JavaScript, or even PHP.  Again, sorry if you
> think this post is off topic but it's the foundation of getting XSL
> Transformed to XHTML and I could really use some help here.
> 
> Thanks kindly!
> 
> Jim in Vancouver
I am not really sure what your question is - I assume you are asking if
it is better to do client side transformation vs server side.

Here is my opinion (this and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee). I
think client side transformations are novel, but not that useful.
Browsers were designed to view html, not do transformations. While xslt
is being added to browsers it seems like it is still too proprietary
right now to use it in a business sense. A bit like dhtml a couple years
ago - some stuff works across all some doesn't.

Let me state that I have never used client side transformations - I am
only stating what I have seen posted to the list. "It works in MS not in
NS...it works on mozilla but not IE" etc. If you are doing something for
"two important clients" I would recommend using client side
transformations. You have more control over you xslt and xml parsers,
and you only have to worry about cross broswer css, html, dhtml and js
instead of cross browser css, html, dhtml, js, AND xslt.

> 1. Client Side XSL:
>    Pros: JavaScript doesn't rely on type of server
>    Cons: Doesn't work in Netscape
xslt doesn't rely on the type of server. If written using standards.

> 
> 2. ASP Server Side XSL:
>    Pros: Works in latest IE and Netscape
>    Cons: APS Servers Only

Well, the code you posted only works on an ASP server but xslt is not specific 
to ASP. In fact, Coccon (see http://cocoon.apache.org/2.0/) is an xslt server. It
uses xslt instead of vb as it scripting. I posted some items 
http://treebeard.sourceforge.net/cfx_treebeard.php that allow xslt to work on 
cold fusion, and JSP (actually coldfusion can do xslt by default but it is limited,
and the JSP stuff you can write yourself I just did it for convenience)

There is my $0.02 (which is worth less then the euro right now :)) 

Cheers,
Rob

-- 
Rob Rohan <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx>


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list