From: "R. Mark Volkmann" <volkmann2@...>
Date: 2001-11-17T00:18:27+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:25435] Re: ANN: REXML 1.1a3

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tobias Reif" <tobiasreif@pinkjuice.com>
To: "ruby-talk ML" <ruby-talk@ruby-lang.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 7:40 AM
Subject: [ruby-talk:25427] Re: ANN: REXML 1.1a3


> There are many cases of XML to XML, where XSLT is not appropriate.

"many" is too strong. In my experience, XSLT is appropriate for most XML to
XML transformations.

> XSLT is great for cases where a template oriented approach fits well.

... which in my experience is most cases.

> Where speed is a concern, large amounts of data are processed, very
> complex computations are required, or the visual output format doesn't
> have any automatic layout, general programming languages (in combination
> with SAX/DOM/RubyWayAPI/... 'parser&manipulator&writer packages') are
> often a much better fit.

I agree with this ... except that I don't know what you mean by "visual
output format". To me, performance would be the number one reason from
performing an XML to XML transformation with something other than XSLT.