On Monday, 16. December 2002 09:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > But then I quickly started to realise XPathScript's limitations in its > > declarative system, and slowly migrated to XSLT, which I now feel is > > more powerful (despite often being much more verbose). > > Hmm. > > I am still very fond of XPathScript, as it allows easy mixing of > program-flow decisions and HTML output and having real "programs" > called by a xml-tag and bubble the output of the perl code through > the stylesheets. > > So I never tried XSLT. Perl subs then have to to taglibs, don't they?
That's what Matt meant: XSLT works differently. There is no Perl whatsoever involved with XSLT. But don't be fooled by the Syntax. XSLT is turing-complete, and using EXSLT-Functions (see www.exslt.org) you have most of the stuff you need and can do quite complex things. Not that you need to, since often you just don't need to go programming with XSLT. Taglibs belong to XSP and have nothing to do with XSLT. XSP doesn't compare well to XPathScript or XSLT since it works more like HTML::Mason or PHP. -- CU Joerg PGP Public Key at http://ich.bin.kein.hoschi.de/~trouble/public_key.asc PGP Key fingerprint = D34F 57C4 99D8 8F16 E16E 7779 CDDC 41A4 4C48 6F94 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
