Subject: Re: [xsl] apply-templates vs. call-template problem From: "Greg Fausak" <lgfausak@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Mon, 16 Jun 2008 10:41:06 -0500 |
The overhead is mostly due to open source usage compliance issues. Overhead issues also include building, storing and executing java and libraries and classes on the source and target platforms. Plus legal stuff (which I know have been relaxed recently). I really like java, but, if I can get the job done without it that would be simpler, hence better. -g On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 10:18 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2008/6/16 Greg Fausak <lgfausak@xxxxxxxxx>: >> On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Andrew Welch <andrew.j.welch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> 2008/6/16 Greg Fausak <lgfausak@xxxxxxxxx>: >>>> What's a good unix xslt processor? >>> >>> Saxon >>> >>> http://saxonica.com >>> >> >> I normally don't mess around with java based >> stuff unless there just isn't any other way. I've written >> my share of java code. The overhead with including a java >> app in a distribution is pretty high. But, it looks like >> in this xml/xslt world all roads lead to java/saxon :-) > > What is the overhead in including a java app in a distribution? > > > -- > Andrew Welch > http://andrewjwelch.com > Kernow: http://kernowforsaxon.sf.net/ > > -- Greg Fausak greg@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] apply-templates vs. call-, Andrew Welch | Thread | RE: [xsl] apply-templates vs. call-, Michael Kay |
Re: [xsl] apply-templates vs. call-, Andrew Welch | Date | RE: [xsl] apply-templates vs. call-, Michael Kay |
Month |