Mozilla versus I.E. with XSL

[cramd]

I have found several examples using XSL and I continue to have my problem where it will not display as an HTML page in Mozilla as it does in I.E. I've read that IE has a parser built into it (MSXML) that allows for this transformation. If Mozilla does not have a parser, do I look for a plugin or do I run it through a java processor?? Or should I finally give up on trying to make Mozilla display my XML as a web page--which really isn't the solution for me. Any examples or links would be greatly appreciated......even a simple "Hello World" example would be great. Nothing I seem to find displays correctly with Mozilla....
cramd

 

[simonchristieis]

Mozilla has a website!!!

http://www.mozilla.org/xmlextras/xmldataislands/

 

[cramd]

I've been at Mozilla's website and that is where I began thinking I needed some type of Xalan processor for my XML doc's and then also have been reading about the "transformix" with Mozilla.....and now you have pointed me to data islands. I'll work the examples, but can you tell me--am I trying the impossible.....or is it possible to make one xml document with an xsl that works both with I.E and Mozilla....or should I be considering a xml & xsl document for I.E. and one xml & xsl document for Mozilla??? OR consider the xalan processor that takes the xml/xsl documents and outputs them to html.....
cramd

 

[simonchristieis]

If I were you I would steer clear of trying to support ie5.5(bad xml support) and ie on a mac(no xml support).
Apart from those, most browsers' latest versions will support xml - xsl, the best advise I can give is stick to w3cdom guidelines or create functionality that does eg

http://sarissa.sourceforge.net/

which replicates the selectNodes (and others) method to work on mozilla platform.

Hope this helps

Simon

 

[gorgonz]

Hi cramd,

I have the state 'reading to learn about xml'. Nevertheless I've read an article, where there is reported, that Microsoft implemented xml pretty early for ie. Unfortunatelly the w3c team changed some of the definitions before releasing V1.0. Microsoft did not yet update to this version. On the other hand, I found out, that mozilla firebird supports V1.0, but there are still lacks.

I would not tend to take ie 'as is', because it was reported that the will migrate.

 

[ChrisHunt]

The only safe option for public web sites (IMO) is to do your XSL transformation at the server side and send (X)HTML to the browser. Browser implementations of XSL (where they exist) are too variable to be relied upon.

-- Chris Hunt

http://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk

http://www.napitalia.org.uk

http://www.leicesteryha.org.uk

 

[simonchristieis]

Chris,

I agree - but sometimes it is necessary, I have an application that requires me to list all continents, countries and cities in the world in drop down boxes.

The specifications ask for dynamic select lists without refreshing the page.

Rather than download all the information, and store it in arrays in the page, I just load the xml file and query it using xpath - the difference in download times is - 30-40 seconds (thats on a t1 line!), now my page loads in 3-4 seconds and still has good functionality.

I agree about safe options for public websites - but then I develop for the latest versions of each browser - if the client does not have the latest version, then I think it's up to him to update - not down to me going blind writing backward compatible code, otherwise we might as well go back to html 1 (no images, no formatting etc!)

Not ranting at you - just frustrated at an industry thats insists you know all the latest technologies and then insists you support nn4!!

I'll get back in my box now.

Simon

 

[ChrisHunt]

"If the client does not have the latest version, then I think it's up to him to update"

That's a workable philosophy if you have (some degree of) control over the client, or if you aren't trying to attract the widest reange of customers to your site.

It says to older browser users (say IE 5.x) "Before using this site you must go elsewhere, download a multi-megabyte file and install it on your PC". Many users, especially non techno-savvy ones or those on dial-ups, are going to say "No thanks - I'll go elsewhere".

My own philosophy regarding NS4 et al is to make my sites usable in any browser, but only pretty in newer ones.

In your case it sounds like you'd drive away many more customers with that 30 second wait than with the XML requirements, but I thought it worth pointing out the problems with client-side XSL for other possible readers.

-- Chris Hunt

http://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk

http://www.napitalia.org.uk

http://www.leicesteryha.org.uk

 

[cramd]

I've been away and just now have realized how this discussion has grown.....
My XML documents will be stored on a network drive--not a public website. Although, I have some users that will only use IE and then others that will only use Mozilla.

The training class that I attended based everything on using IE for it's browser--I only wish some information would have been given on the different browser support.

Thanks for the links and all the discussions.
cramd