Joerg Heinicke skrev:
On 13.07.2007 10:31, Grzegorz Kossakowski wrote:
...
Actually I'm not very keen on any templating approach at all. I don't like to first provide data to some template context and second retrieve it from there in the template. IMO it's much better to have a complete push approach and only encroach if it is necessary (like XSLT templates). (My diploma thesis was about this btw.)
I prefer a push approach as well. But this project is not about creating the ideal template framework. It is about keeping back compatibility and at the same time giving users a simpler and cleaner way forward for new development and possible refactoring of old stuff.

AFAIU, it will be possible to use the object model without any default content, (is that true Grzegorz?). In such a scenario you can have a pure push approach, by only pushing the data that should be rendered into the object model.
A possible implementation for this is to convert the form model into an XML representation
Not everything is in forms. We need a mechanism for rendering model data without connecting it to a form.
and let a quite generic XSLT do the rest. With this approach no EL come into play. This also means there is a separate object-to-string step.
I preferred that kind of solution once. But now I find it unnecessary complicated in most cases. The first problem is that it requires some work to convert bean structure to XML data. You will probably need some configuration file that handle part of the conversion. In comparison to just applying an EL to a bean structure it is more complicated. Second, many people find XSLT much more complicated than a simple template language. Third, the development of XSLT processors and tooling, has been a disappointment. Xalan, still doesn't implement XSLT 2.0, and the error messages from both Xalan and Saxon can often be cryptic or non existent.

In the end XSLT has its uses, but for simple rendering of beans I find simple template languages like JXTG much more productive (and I have written tons of XSLT).

/Daniel

Reply via email to