I don't know of an official list. The problem is that its difficult to 
determine without a browser test. Mozilla can be compiled with or without 
XSLT support, and I have never tested Netscape to know if it actually has 
XSLT compiled in or not, or in which versions and subversions of the two 
browsers it is actually enabled.

As for MSIE it is a seperate ActiveX component, the MSXML component. Basically 
any modern version of IE MIGHT be able to do XSLT, if the right components 
are installed. To make it more fun MS has released numerous versions of MSXML 
with giant variations on XSLT support. The earliest ones are completely 
broken and won't work with any realistic stylesheet. The later ones are quite 
good. 

AFAIK no other browsers have meaningful XSLT support.

And of course in general the quality of the XSLT engine and its quirks very 
greatly. After having built several test pages and hammered on Mozilla and IE 
XSLT I would rate it as being at a level similar to what JavaScript support 
was at 5 years ago. You can do a few nice things fairly reliably with it on 
the right platforms, but deploying it as a core part of a site wouldn't work.

On Friday 04 July 2003 07:11 pm, Michael A Nachbaur wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Another thought/question.  Many versions of modern browsers support
> client-side XSL transformation, but as we all know no two XSL engines are
> created equal (especially when dealing with bloody IE ... but I digress).
>
> Anyway, I know that with the HTTP compression Apache modules that it has a
> list of browsers that incorrectly advertise gzip support.  Is there a
> module / code snippet that'll allow me to determine if the client has
> "real" support for client-side XSLT, allowing me to just spit out XML?
>
> If not, I feel an itch that I might have to go and scratch.

-- 
Tod Harter
Giant Electronic Brain
http://www.giantelectronicbrain.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to