Any reason not to use client-side XSL?? (was: Preferred tool for folding XML into HTML)

[Paul Prescod]

Russell Turpin wrote:
> 
> It seems clear that XSL is the way to go. I have heard that
> Internet Explorer supports client-side style sheets, i.e.,
> your webapp returns the XML with reference to stylesheet,
> and IE will retreive the style sheet and apply it on the
> client side. I haven't read the details of this yet, but it
> seems slick, and raises some other questions:
> 
> Wouldn't this be simpler than applying the translation on the
> server side?

Not usually. :(

> Is this standard? Do/will other browsers support this?

Yes, it is somewhat standard. I think that some builds of Mozilla
support it but not all. "Netscape Navigator" seems to:

http://developer.netscape.com/evangelism/docs/articles/xslt/

The docs there do not seem to say how to actually include the XSLT file
but I presume it is the same as with IE.

Opera does not support client-side XSLT.

Lynx does not support client-side XSLT.

I would be surprised if hand-held computer browsers supported XSLT.

> Are there disadvantages to applying the style sheet
> client-side?

Well, there is compatibility with minority browsers.

There is compatibility with older versions of browsers.

There is the risk of small differences between the XSLT handling in
major browsers (just speculating...I haven't done client-side XSLT). As
usual, write once test once per browser version.

Server-side XSLT can use extensions to a particular XSLT engine to pull
in (e.g.) Python code or SQL statements etc.

If none of these are a concern, client-side XSLT might be the right
thing for you.

 Paul Prescod