Nathan, You are right that it is easier, and in most cases, better to pass html to the browser. When you start to target multiple formats from the same data source, XML is likely to be a better choice. XML to the browser is not practical except in a very controlled environment. It will take a couple of years before it is practical. Today, it is very practical to transform XML to HTML, or any other format for presentation. Cocoon, another open source project that works great on the iSeries, but has trouble getting along with WebSphere, is a publishing framework that fits that niche. David Morris >>> firstname.lastname@example.org 01/04/02 12:37PM >>> From: "Rob Dixon" <email@example.com> > It could easily generate XML as well if I could find a use for it. If the concept of "Web Services" ever takes off, then there will be a use for XML. As far as downloading XML to the browser, and using it in the user interface? That's a good question! Is anybody using client-side script and XML to generate the user interface? I've read some book chapters on the subject, but haven't quite got the picture. It seems so much easier to simply download HTML. Any other views would be appreciated. Nathan M. Andelin www.relational-data.com
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.