Abie,
At 12:21 PM 10/1/2003, you wrote:
can someone please explain what the difference is between using literal
result elements and using <xsl:element>, and what pros and cons exist?
Stay tuned, someone will say....
I have been using <xsl:element>, b/c it had seemed the more correct
somehow, but from what I'm reading on literal result elements, they should
work just as well, and they even offer the advantage of being able
categorically to use attribute value templates. (-and they're in the book,
so that means they're legitimate.;) ).
They're legitimate as can be.
I mainly use literal result elements because they're easier to type and to
read and debug (since they look like fragments of the target).
However I know an esteemed XML uber-guru who uses xsl:element so that he
can use the tagging support in his preferred coding environment (Emacs)
with validation and tag completion.
There are a number of things you can do with xsl:element that aren't
possible with literal result elements, whose advantage is mainly
conciseness and ease of use.
Also there's the "literal result element as stylesheet" feature (check the
spec), which isn't actually used all that much in my experience: it's
syntax sugar for a "pull" stylesheet.
Cheers,
Wendell
======================================================================
Wendell Piez
mailto:wapiez(_at_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Mulberry Technologies, Inc. http://www.mulberrytech.com
17 West Jefferson Street Direct Phone: 301/315-9635
Suite 207 Phone: 301/315-9631
Rockville, MD 20850 Fax: 301/315-8285
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mulberry Technologies: A Consultancy Specializing in SGML and XML
======================================================================
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list