David,
David Carlisle wrote:
Doing a two-step transformation seems easier at this points. We consider
doing the first part (constructing the stylesheet that performs the
actual transformation) as part of the strutscx action.
That's odd because having generated a stylesheet on teh fly you then
have to use that as the main transformation stylesheet, ie exactly the
thing you said was hard to do.
My mistake, I misled you there.
My point is this: we're going to have more than one dynamic include,
i.e. the main stylesheet B would need to include, say, two more
templates (C and D) dynamically (in addition to A which is always
included as a module).
Following your suggestions, we would write a strutscx action that
combines C and D, then include B (and A). 'The XSLT way'.
But I fail to to see the difference to doing it this way: write a
strutscx action that takes B (and A), and inserts C and D. Does the same
thing, only maybe not the 'XSLT way'.
Actually, is there a written requirement that states how dynamic
includes should be handled the XSLT way?
Cheers,
Ralph