Re: XML & XSLT

Caching data is universally accepted. You can either do it within the script or use a cache server which runs something like squid. It depends how dynamic the data really is. Our content management stuff runs on an hourly cycle, refreshing itself once per hour. We are within the next week moving over to squid. XSL isnt difficult to learn, it's actually quite simple if you consider the mass of functions you need to learn for any normal programming language. "Hardik Doshi" <php_hardik@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:20030507202929.31698.qmail@web14703.mail.yahoo.com... > XML is universally standard. So its better to go for > XML+XSLT solution for separating presentation layer > from business logic layer. > > If anyone knows about performance issues with XML+XSLT > then please let me know. I am not able to figure out > the performance hit with this technology. > > If anyone has done some work with it then it would be > nice if i can see that and get some idea. > > Thanks > > Hardik > --- luis <luis@fuegolabs.com> wrote: > > Using XML+XSLT just to present content as HTML is > > usually wrong even if > > you plan to render different presentations Smarty > > can do that faster and > > simpler. > > Don't use Tomahawks to kill flies. > > > > --- > > Luis Argerich ( ) ASCII > > Ribbon Campaign > > http://tikiwiki.sourceforge.net X against > > HTML on email > > "There's no spoon" / \ and > > Usenet posts > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Hardik Doshi [mailto:php_hardik@yahoo.com] > > > Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2003 11:46 AM > > > To: Justin French; Davy Obdam; Info@Best-IT > > > Cc: PHP general > > > Subject: [PHP] XML & XSLT > > > > > > > > > Hi Everyone, > > > > > > Sorry for changing the subject of this thread but > > i > > > think it makes more sense for archiving purpose. > > > > > > I am really looking to go into XML+XSLT world > > using > > > PHP as server side scripting language. I did lots > > of > > > research about it. Previously i was comparing > > XML+XSLT > > > and Smarty. You will find previous discussions > > from > > > archive > > > > > > I still have doubt about performance issues with > > > XML+XSLT. On every user click, server needs to > > process > > > XML+XSL using XSLT to output XHTML (or anyother > > > format)Someone suggest me to use cache but i still > > i > > > am not satisfied with it. > > > > > > If you guys have any idea then please let me know. > > If > > > you have any references or tutorials then please > > > forward those to me. > > > > > > One thing is sure..XML+XSLT is pretty powerful but > > it > > > is very complicated to understand spcially XSL. > > > > > > Anyway keep talking more about this topic. I would > > be > > > happy to answer some of the questions. > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Hardik > > > > > > > > > --- Justin French <justin@indent.com.au> wrote: > > > > Any links to really good articles on this stuff? > > > > > > > > Justin > > > > > > > > > > > > on 07/05/03 5:05 AM, Davy Obdam > > (info@davyobdam.com) > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > > > There a few possibilty`s here i think: > > > > > > > > > > 1. Using CSS to display XML client side, > > however i > > > > think this is usualy > > > > > a bad idea, mainly because not all browsers > > > > suppoit it > > > > > 2. Using XSLT to transform your XML on the > > > > client(to XHTML), well same > > > > > as the above, not all browser are yet capable > > of > > > > doing this, and you > > > > > probably have more data in your XML file that > > you > > > > would like your client > > > > > to see... maybe. > > > > > 3. The best option is to use XSLT to transform > > > > your XML and doing it on > > > > > the server. This adds flexiblity because now > > you > > > > can create multiple XSL > > > > > stylesheets to transform your XML in the > > required > > > > output format, XML, > > > > > XHTML, cHTML or whatever you may need. > > > > > In case of a webbrowser on a PC/Mac your send > > the > > > > client gets valid > > > > > XHTML, wich is HTML wich confirms to the XML > > > > standards;-) > > > > > > > > > > Just my 0,2 cents > > > > > > > > > > Info@Best-IT wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> I've heard a lot that XML is taking over. Is > > the > > > > browser going to read some > > > > >> kind of HTML or straight HTML. Take FlashMX > > for > > > > instance, you can build a > > > > >> movie which is essentially an application > > driven > > > > by XML. But the XML is > > > > >> like a Database with nodes instead of > > records. > > > > This can be dynamically > > > > >> generated and read by the Flash movie, but > > > > because it's flash. If you took > > > > >> that same flow and created an app that had a > > > > browser for the front end > > > > >> instead of flash player, how would you get > > the > > > > browser to understand what it > > > > >> needed to display? Are browsers going to be > > > > re-written? - Most likely my > > > > >> thought process is off track. Mainly I don't > > > > understand how a browser can > > > > >> read XML? > > > > >> > > > > >> R/T > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > > > Davy Obdam > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > > > To unsubscribe, visit: > > http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. > > > http://search.yahoo.com > > > > > > -- > > > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > > To unsubscribe, visit: > > http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > > > > > -- > > PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) > > To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo. > http://search.yahoo.com