Subject: RE: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT From: "Houghton,Andrew" <houghtoa@xxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:40:05 -0400 |
> From: James A. Robinson [mailto:jim.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 3:36 PM > To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT > > > >>>>> "James" == James A Robinson <jim.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > James> could get at or talk to via XSLT. Once you've got a way > of > > James> running HTTP POST operations from XSLT, > > > > That's xsl:result-document. > > Heh, well there's a problem trying to do that. If you've got a service > where you POST a request and expect to read a reponse document, then > xsl:result-document isn't so hot. We are in fact playing around with > using > xsl:result-document and using URI #fragments to indicate write vs read, > but I'm not sold that it's the best way to handle things. Not clear how you are using URI #fragments, but be aware that the user agent does not send those to the server. So your XSLT that is responding to the request will never see them. Andy.
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, James A. Robinson | Thread | Re: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, James A. Robinson |
RE: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Michael Kay | Date | RE: [xsl] LINQ to XML versus XSLT, Houghton,Andrew |
Month |