Re: jade X openjade

From: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar(at)frodo(dot)hserus(dot)net>
To: pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: jade X openjade
Date: 2004-02-21 08:13:10
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: pgsql-docs

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Halley Pacheco de Oliveira wrote:
>> In my Athon 1.7 512 MB RAM computer with Debian it
>> takes 2m6s to generate de PostgreSQL 7.4.1 HTML
>> documentation using JADE and 4m7s using OPENJADE
>> (almost 2X). So why use OPENJADE ?
> I would have to double check, but I think OPENJADE offers better backend
> support.
> Personally I think the real question should be, Why *JADE*? We should be
> doing whatever it takes to move to XML/XSLT.
> Using Apache xerces I can transform a 1000 page document in less than a
> minute.

I have used xercess-C++ in my current project and I can tell you one thing. It's
object model is broken.

It is a fine API in general but the way it's object model is broken, makes me
hate it.. really..

Given a better choice I wouldn't use it. But I haven't used any other XML
toolkits either. My XML experience is pretty limited..


In response to


Browse pgsql-docs by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Joshua D. Drake 2004-02-21 20:42:12 Re: jade X openjade
Previous Message Joshua D. Drake 2004-02-20 16:49:50 Re: jade X openjade