- From: Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 17:33:54 +0000
- To: "Lester Ward" <lward@rentec.com>
- Cc: www-xsl-fo@w3.org
On 05/03/07, Lester Ward <lward@rentec.com> wrote: > Be advised however: when you use XSLT to transform your XML data into a format that can be > processed by XSL-FO, that format is _also_ just an XML file. There is nothing stopping you > from just changing your flat data directly into files for XSL-FO directly, skipping XML > conversion and XSLT altogether. Except the re-use concept. xsl-fo is (IMHO) a throw-away format, just like an object file. > > Advantages of this approach: > > o Don't need to learn XSLT, which can be tricky. Just something harder, like programming > o Faster execution time, which sounds like it may matter to you. > > Disadvantages of this approach: > > o Inflexible. The standard XML->XSLT->XSL-FO approach can basically do anything by > changing the rules in the XSLT. Skipping that step, you are essentially "hard-coding" your > output to to be exactly one thing. In most cases, this is not something you do on purpose. which some people find a hardship. > > > To me, making the choice would largely center around what your "official" format will be > going forward. And how good your Xtal ball is? <beenThereDoneThat/> -- Dave Pawson XSLT XSL-FO FAQ. http://www.dpawson.co.uk
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 17:35:13 UTC