On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:55:43 -0300, Lance Java
wrote:
Sorry for the off topic conversation but I can't resist :)
Me neither . . . And don't forget that I actually like FreeMarker very
much. :)
On the other hand, I'm not sure it has support for XPath selectors in
the
FreeMarker decla
Sorry for the off topic conversation but I can't resist :)
> On the other hand, I'm not sure it has support for XPath selectors in the
FreeMarker declarative XML processing, which is usually the best approach
for more complex XML structures.
Freemarker supports XPath selectors... see here
http://
On Tue, 20 Mar 2012 09:28:39 -0300, Lance Java
wrote:
Actually, XSLT makes sense when the source document is XML already.
I disagree, both freemarker and XSLT need to parse the XML input into
some form of DOM object before applying a transformation to it. Do you
agree
that XSLT templat
> Actually, XSLT makes sense when the source document is XML already.
I disagree, both freemarker and XSLT need to parse the XML input into some
form of DOM object before applying a transformation to it. Do you agree
that XSLT templates are far more verbose than Freemarker templates?
> Sorry, La
