If you wanna compare you need to compare Flow vs. Actions and XSP vs. Transformers (or other server pages / templating approaches).
The discussion really takes a strange way when comparing these both concepts.
...not any stranger than comparing Flow vs. XSP ;)
Flow vs. XSP was actually what I meant.
IMO it's obvious: the mixture of coding languages (Java + XML) and the mixture of abstraction levels. But this abstraction does not make the coding easier, you have to know the implementation details to work around all possible mistakes: How often it is suggested to have a look at the generated Java files! In general we need a XML only XSP (i.e. without any Java written by hand) with minimum of flow support:
<xsp:if>, <xsp:for-each>, etc.
...because it should only be used as view. agreed
Yes, afterwards it's very similar to XSLT or other template languages as JXTemplate.
The power of XSP is not XSP itself, but the further abstraction levels as esql as Leszek pointed out. This would make an XML only XSP to a really powerful template language in contrary to a programming language with nasty syntax at the moment.
...well, totally agree. But that's only a question how it used - isn't it? XSP leaves room for heavy abuse! I guess that's the major problems. ...plus that debugging is a pain :)
Exactly, we must do it impossible to abuse it :-) Going towards an XML only template language would also allow to have an interpreter instead of compiling transformed java files.
-- System Development VIRBUS AG Fon +49(0)341-979-7419 Fax +49(0)341-979-7409 [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.virbus.de
