This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: differences
- To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
- Subject: Re: differences
- From: "Sebastian Rahtz" <sebastian dot rahtz at computing-services dot oxford dot ac dot uk>
- Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2000 22:23:19 +0000 (GMT)
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10003061618040.2456-100000@goon.stg.brown.edu>
- Reply-To: xsl-list at mulberrytech dot com
Carole E. Mah writes:
>
> Do people have strong opinions about which processor is better, and why
> (Xalan, XT, Saxon, other)?
>
> I've searched the archives, and there are bits and pieces of opinions here
> and there, but no cohesive statements by anyone listing (all together in
> one posting) the reasons to prefer one over another.
- XT is best because its the fastest
- Saxon is best because it implements all the spec
- Oracle is best because it has a C version alongside (incomplete)
- Xalan is best because it it is politically correct (in Apache)
- Microsoft is best 'cos its in the browser
If Michael Kay's reported optimization changes in Saxon live up to
expectations (ie it reaches the approximate speed of XT), I for one
plan to switch to it from XT. Perhaps a downside (or strength,
depending on your view) is that it has a single author who does it for
"fun".[1] The fact that James Clark seems to have gone entirely quiet
with xt (ie it is still incomplete vis-a-vis the spec) shows the problem
with that.
If Microsoft release a version of their XSLT which 100% implements
the spec, of course the picture changes dramatically.
sebastian
[1] I assume. I hope I don't misrepresent Michael.
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list