Hi all
Upon reading a forum post today, I stopped to think about the usage of custom XSLT to completely replace the mapper, custom scripting functoids and the built-in functoids.
Some people can’t be bothered using the mapper and go straight to custom xslt whenever a mapping is to be created. Others use the built-in functoids whenever possible. And the rest go for some path in the middle, with functoids and the occasional scripting functoid whenever the built-in functoids either can’t get the job done or seem to be too troublesome to use.
The advantages of custom XSLT
The advantages of using the built-in functoids
The advantages of using functoids and the scripting functoids
My preference
Well, those that read my blog regularly wont be surprised when I say that my preference is to use the built-in functoids whenever possible. I turn to XSLT only when I cannot solve my problem with the built-in functoids. And when I need XSLT, I always use custom scripting functoids to supplement the other functoids, so I let as much of the job as possible be handles by built-in functoids. I never use custom XSLT to replace the map. My main reasons for this are:
If I am doing a rally complex map where the number of custom scripting functoids is larger than the number of built-in functoids, I might consider using a custom XSLT script… but this haven’t happened yet And also, if i run into really serious performance issues, I will consider it as well, off course.
Just my thoughts.
-- eliasen
Remember Me
a@href@title, b, blockquote@cite, em, i, strike, strong, sub, sup, u
Theme design by Jelle Druyts
Powered by: newtelligence dasBlog 2.3.9074.18820
The opinions expressed herein are my own personal opinions and do not represent my employer's view in any way.
© Copyright 2024, Jan Eliasen
E-mail