> Actually, XSLT makes sense when the source document is XML already. I disagree, both freemarker and XSLT need to parse the XML input into some form of DOM object before applying a transformation to it. Do you agree that XSLT templates are far more verbose than Freemarker templates?
> Sorry, Lance, my flame war detector failed to detect it in this thread. Sorry for the inconvenience. :P I'm not trying to start a flame war here. It just seems that people blindly often choose XSLT for XML transformations without considering freemarker. In this thread, trsvax mentions using JAXB to convert java objects to XML so that they can be passed to XSLT which parses them into DOM objects. Why not just pass the java objects to freemarker and avoid XML all together? I just want people to assess their options before choosing XSLT which is in my opinion, way too verbose. I also feel that freemarker has a much smaller learning curve and that a java developer can easily jump in. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Date: Tuesday, 20 March 2012 Subject: Make Report PDF To: Tapestry users <users@tapestry.apache.org>, Chris Mylonas < ch...@opencsta.org> Cc: Lance Java <lance.j...@googlemail.com> On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 08:42:14 -0300, Chris Mylonas <ch...@opencsta.org> wrote: > Mr Diplomatic Thiago...you just poured a bucket of cold water over a nice fresh flame war :) Sorry, Lance, my flame war detector failed to detect it in this thread. Sorry for the inconvenience. :P Funny enough, I work for a company that does use XSLT a lot and I like it. I don't love it (its whitespace handling sucks), but I like it when used in the right places. :) -- Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer, and instructor Owner, Ars Machina Tecnologia da Informação Ltda. http://www.arsmachina.com.br
