[XSL-LIST Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date]

RE: [xsl] Using Extension Functions - Its Efficiency


Subject: RE: [xsl] Using Extension Functions - Its Efficiency
From: "Joshua Allen" <joshuaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2004 14:54:15 -0800

Well, doing so partially defeats the purpose of using XSLT, since it
means your stylesheets will not work in many other systems.  It begs the
question, if you find that Java is needed, then why use XSL at all?  Why
not just write the app in Java?

In any case, if you want to still use XSL and be as portable as
possible, I would recommend using the exslt templates at www.exslt.org
before giving up and writing your own extensions.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-xsl-
> list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pramodh Peddi
> Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 2:17 PM
> To: xsl-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [xsl] Using Extension Functions - Its Efficiency
> 
> I am using JDK1.4 API for Transformation, which uses Xalan-Java
> internally.
> 
> Is it a good idea using Extensions functions in Java language. I found
> myself very uncomfortable when I have complicated string processing in
> xsl.
> So, I am implementing those in Java language and calling them from
XSLs.
> 
> I also use Xalan's built in functions, like tokenize(), when ever
> available.
> 
> Is that a bad practice? Does it add any performance hit? And is it bad
> memory-wise?
> 
> Any suggestions would be appreciated!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Pramodh.
> 
> 
>  XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list


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



Current Thread
Keywords