I'll assume you are referring to XSL-T and not XSL-FO. I've found XSL-T to be a great way to do a lot of different things in a standard way, but for most purposes it is overkill and it tends to a maintainence headache (I hesitate to say nightmare) in production.
See my other posting about CGI::XMLApplication for more on your actual question. I'm not sure how it makes sense to have as a subclass since it is just an output mechanism (is there a CGI::Application::Template?), but I'm not really familiar with common usage either. On Wednesday, 26 December 2001, at 09:45:53, Jesse Erlbaum wrote: > Hi All -- > > Have any of you seen the article on Perl.com earlier this month, "XML and > Modern CGI Applications" by Kip Hampton? > > Evidently, Kip has written a module "CGI::XMLApplication". It appears to be > 90% about state management and 10% about XSL. It is the type of thing which > would be quite trivial to make as a sub-class of CGI::Application. > > Does anyone here currently use or anticipate using XSL with their > CGI:Application modules? If so, I would be interested in talking to you > about which would be desirable in a "CGI::Application::XSL" module. > > Thanks & TTYL, > > -Jesse- > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
