john.markor@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 
> This bring up an interesting point.  Is there an advantage to saving 
the HTML file and delivering a static version to a browser rather than 
>a dynamic version delivered on the fly using XSL and, say IE5 (just for 
> an example.)

For most sites, the advantage of saving the HTML is compatibility with IE
1-4 and Netscape 1-5.

> I've always been under the impressiion that the dynamic delivery is 
> preferable from a management standpoint - could I be wrong here?

In a simple system, XML delivery is easier to manage because you don't
need to continually make sure that the HTML always reflects the XML. In a
slightly more complex system, that management can be handled entirely by
software -- it's a sort of server-side cache.

-- 
 Paul Prescod  - ISOGEN Consulting Engineer speaking for only himself
 http://itrc.uwaterloo.ca/~papresco

"I don't want you to describe to me -- not ever -- what you were doing
to that poor boy to make him sound like that; but if you ever do it
again, please cover his mouth with your hand," Grandmother said.
	-- John Irving, "A Prayer for Owen Meany"


 XSL-List info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list