Daniel Fagerstrom wrote:
And it might make a big difference, from the users point of view, by making it possible to use a single tool for the whole presentation pipeline, and making presentation templates way easier than raw XSLT, which is a major stumbling block for many people.
We might want to make it work first, to see how much people like it. If they like it, I'm sure someone will find a way to make it fast, if needed.
You're right no need to optimize until we know if it is needed. AFAICS the only reasonable way of accessing the XML input is things like XPath that in general need access to the complete XML-tree. And in that case we can reuse XSLT processor technology if needed. Going for something like STX-style access would be far to complecated for the intended audience.
Why is STX considered more complex than XSLT? Sure it doesn't have arbitrary source tree access, but the syntax is very similar to XSLT by design. Instead of <xsl:template>, you have <stx:template>. I still think that STX would act as an effective macro expansion mechanism instead of having macros in Java/SAX.
- Miles Elam
