Tim Funk wrote: > Do you mean take the XML doc and perform an xslt transformation on the > server before it gets sent to the client? (I thought original patch did > that.)
No, just return HTML in the first place. I just don't understand - when you can just display HTML, why do you want to go through XML and then XSLT ??? > The dtd was really just an easy explanation of what the fields meant. > The only reason I suggested this was if an xml doc is published (which > it seems your leaning against), then a user will ask what the fields mean. > My reason for leaning towards an xml doc is so I can push fields to MRTG > (or similar) in the future. Or so I can easily integrate this into my > helpdesk. I submit some changes and get rejected, I won't take it > personally. I'll just keep trying. XHTML is also XML. Do the XSLT transformation to whatever XML format you want - instead of forcing the vast majority of people who'll just use the browser to go through a XSLT transformation. I'm ok with a separate servlet that generates an XML. But if we do that - we should use a format that is extensible or check what other people are doing instead of just inventing one. Apache doesn't seem to generate an XML or other complexities - and there are apps that can parse it and do whatever they need to do. Costin > > -Tim > > Costin Manolache wrote: >> Tim Funk wrote: >> >> >>>I am in the process of reworking the style sheet to make it "prettier". >>> (I do my testing in mozilla) >>> >>>I will also try to: >>>- create a DTD which will explain the xml output >>>- add an option to allow the user to change the style sheet >>>- incorporate more information into the XML doc output >>>- wish to change the user who can see this ( So a help desk or >>>monitoring app can use this without having all the privledges of manager) >> >> >> >> Please, don't ! >> >> Just display plain XHTML - it is a very bad idea to display the page in >> XML+XSL. >> >> Also I am very strongly against creating arbitrary XML DTDs ( and the >> current DTD is one very bad form - it's not extensible, etc ). >> >> >> >>>I hope to have a submit a pathc tomorrow. With luck I will also post a >>>demonstration page to so anyone can see the results without having to >>>compile/run the code too. >> >> >> I'm strongly -1 ( ==veto ) on this implementation ( even if you manage to >> make it work in Mozilla ). XML+XSL is not supported in many browsers, it >> is overkill. The used DTD is pretty bad too. >> >> ( it seems even MSIE5.5 has problems displaying the page ! Do I have to >> install WindowsXP to see the tomcat page ? ) >> >> Costin >> >> >> >> >>>-Tim >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
