> From: toby cabot [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Does Maverick need to support client-side XSLT explicitly? I'm doing
> it now, using the current Maverick. You just need a server-side XSLT
> that applies the stylesheet processing instruction to the XML before
> sending it to the browser. The client-side XSLT's and CSS's can be
> served statically.
I agree. This should be easy to do with the existing Maverick. With a
browser-detecting shunt, you could have a command that looks like this:
<command name="foo">
<view mode="clientXSLCapable" path="foo.xml">
<transform path="addProcessingInstruction.xsl">
<param name="whichXSL" value="completeTransformation.xsl"/>
</transform>
</view>
<view mode="notClientXSLCapable" path="foo.xml">
<transform path="serverCompleteTransformation.xsl"/>
</view>
</command>
This syntax isn't bad, but if you want to make it more elegant you can
always transform the config file.
> I like Maverick because it's very elegant so I'd prefer to avoid
> adding features to the framework where they can be handled by
> application code. If you'd like I can package up an example that
> works with today's Maverick and IE6/Moz.
+1
:-)
Jeff Schnitzer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
[INVALID FOOTER]
