Subject: RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns... From: "Chris Bayes" <Chris@xxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 21:33:02 +0100 |
>> >> >Besides, that often requires to transfer more data. >> >> >> >> Depends on the application >> > >> >That is why I use "often". >> >> I dispute that. It depends on what you send down the line. Obviously you >> wouldn't send a whole SQL database to a client to do a query. >You send the >> results. If the results consist of the minimum amount of data then the >> transform will *always* produce more output than input if you are >> transforming to html (transforming to text less). Add cacheing into the >> equation and client-side transformation will *always* produce less line >> traffic. > >You do not know my but I can assure I am not SO dumb. I made my >measurements >by only sending the necessary XML data. So why say more >There is also the overhead associated with fetching 2 documents (XML, XSL) >instead of one (HTML). In most cases I focused on it only saves traffic if >the browser caches the XSLT. Um no! think of an xslt and an xml snipped to the limit for brevity <xsl:template match="row"> <tr><td><xsl:value-of select="c" /></td></tr> </xsl:template> <row> <c>xxxxx</c> <c>yyyyyy</c> for another 3000 </row> >Now, that being an advantage depends on the nature of the site. It only >works better if the template caching is used often enough. > No not even then! >There are NO absolute rules. One has to analyse case by case. > Yup! >And there is still the issue of having to work with browsers like Netscape, >Opera, older Internet Explorer versions and so on. > And that is a red herring too. I can't browse most stuff on my WAP phone. Did Philips(crosshead) think of that when they produced + screws? Was it a lockin? Who knows. Who cares. You use the right tool for the right job. I am agnostic when it comes to browsers. I am looking forward to ns v6. Check the other parts of my site I bend over backwards to accomodate all of them. >> > >> >> >IMHO, server side transformations rule. >> >> >> >> Are you selling hardware too? >> > >> >I agree that it might be different in an Intranet scenario. >> > >> Slightly but not much. > >Much. In an Intranet there is more control over the used browser and there >is not so much compatibility concerns. You also tend to know the use cases >better. Yeh but by now most developers know the internet. We hope > >> >> >(Is hardware that expensive these days that I would get a profit form >> >preaching this??? >> >=:o) > >This was an irony. Noticed the smiley? > >> Possibly if you are running a data center. The cost of hardware >> is miniscule >> compared to the cost of support staff. > >And of development staff. Yup! et al. > >> Throw more hardware at it is just not an answer to badly designed >> applications as many people are aware. > >Correct, but some people are also aware that throwing more hardware in a >concious and controlled way can be a valid strategy to save development >effort and have faster results. True but now we are talking a finesse and that wasn't the point! > >> I won't even tell you what I think of preachers. > >Again, noticed the irony? Yeh but even a smile doesn't cover the smell of bullshit. Ciao Chris XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
Current Thread |
---|
|
<- Previous | Index | Next -> |
---|---|---|
RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paulo Gaspar | Thread | RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paulo Gaspar |
RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Paulo Gaspar | Date | RE: <xsl:stylesheet xmlns..., Chris Bayes |
Month |