Return-Path: 
 <mbox-dev-return-56-apmail-httpd-mbox-dev-archive=httpd.apache.org@httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-mbox-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 73890 invoked from network); 26 Jun 2005 22:37:47 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 26 Jun 2005 22:37:47 -0000
Received: (qmail 84123 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jun 2005 22:37:46 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-mbox-dev-archive@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 84077 invoked by uid 500); 26 Jun 2005 22:37:46 -0000
Mailing-List: contact mbox-dev-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:mbox-dev@httpd.apache.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mbox-dev-help@httpd.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:mbox-dev-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org>
List-Id: <mbox-dev.httpd.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list mbox-dev@httpd.apache.org
Received: (qmail 84064 invoked by uid 99); 26 Jun 2005 22:37:46 -0000
Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:37:46 -0700
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0
	tests=
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Received: from [216.255.199.145] (HELO utopia.in.force-elite.com)
 (216.255.199.145)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:37:45 -0700
X-AuthUser: chip@force-elite.com
Received: from [10.0.0.142] (10.0.0.142:50173)
	by utopia.in.force-elite.com with [XMail 1.17 (Linux/Ix86) ESMTP Server]
	id <SC083F> for <mbox-dev@httpd.apache.org> from <chip@force-elite.com>;
	Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:37:41 -0700
Message-ID: <42BF2E34.6070101@force-elite.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 2005 15:37:40 -0700
From: Paul Querna <chip@force-elite.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: maxime.petazzoni@bulix.org
CC: mbox-dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: About mod_mbox future improvements
References: <20050622195715.GA5632@bulix.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050622195715.GA5632@bulix.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Maxime Petazzoni wrote:
...
> * XSLT processing
> 
> As far as I remember, the choice of outputting XML satisfies
> everybody. The problem relates to where we'll do the XSLT
> processing. There are two main solutions :
> 
> - client-side processing, as by now. The user requires a capable
>   browser such as Gecko-based browsers.

I am still worried about the portability of client-side processing.
Between all the versions of all the browsers, doing complicated things
seems to be hit and miss to me.

> - server-side processing, using mod_transform (or something else,
>   ideas ? I don't know much about server-side output filters)
> 
> Client-side processing's advantage is to fasten global response time
> since the server have less work to do. Main drawback is the lack of
> XSLT-capable browser (even KHTML doesn't seem to do it).
> 
> Server-side processing corrects this problem, but may slow down the
> response (isn't mod_mbox designed to be as quick as possible ?).

With an XSLT Cache, which mod_transform has, it can render very quickly.

I am a fan of Server-side processing for XSLT.

We still need to make a decision as a group, do we want XSLT?

Do we want an alternative such as ClearSilver templates?

Do we just want 'better' HTML and CSS?

I believe that since the work is already in progress for XSLT, that
makes it a good choice for now.  The decision on server-side vs
client-side is interesting, and perhaps we can meet some middle ground,
but for now, I think we should pursue server-side processing.

-Paul