Converting your XML to HTML at publishing time will almost certainly give
you a performance advantage over doing it at page delivery time, provided
that your content is sufficiently stable to make this possible. It's also
simpler and likely to improve availability.
Michael Kay
-----Original Message-----
From: IceT [mailto:icetbr(_at_)yahoo(_dot_)com(_dot_)br]
Sent: 19 August 2004 05:53
To: xsl-list(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com
Subject: [xsl] Speed: xsl with xml vs. html and the world
My lastest messages in this list has remembered me of this
question. I
belive it may have already be discussed here, but could
someone please
explain to me a little bit of the state of the art of the creation of
webpages?
I mean, specially regarding xml and xsl. Which is better
(speedwise at
least): to publish an xml file to be rendered with an xsl or to
preprocess it and generate an html file to be used? I believe html is
faster, although not dynamic. But there is many ways to add
dynamic code
to html. So wich is the way to go? Is the answer related to
the size of
the page?
Also, if I were to preprocess my xml + xsl files, I could use as well
xslt 2.0, because I wouldn't need to worry about incompabilities.
thanks
--+------------------------------------------------------------------
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list
To unsubscribe, go to: http://lists.mulberrytech.com/xsl-list/
or e-mail:
<mailto:xsl-list-unsubscribe(_at_)lists(_dot_)mulberrytech(_dot_)com>
--+--