Mike write:
> As for the static vs dynamic argument, XSLT is perfect for this sort of
> documentation. You shove the document content in some simple static
> files, and then write separate stylesheets for the html version of the
> doc, and the pdf version, etc.
In terms of browser support, if you are thinking of client-side XSLT, that
support isn't there yet (
http://www.w3schools.com/XSL/xsl_browsers.asp). If
you try for server-side XSLT that instantly means you need some form of
script parsing engine like ASP or PHP which can introduce maintenance issues
if the language ever changes (PHP is quite susceptible to this as extensions
change quite a bit in major releases... and hosting providers usually see no
issue in upgrading to newer versions of PHP).
Unless of course you meant using CLI processing to create static output
files, but then that would be just changing how documentation is produced,
not really dealing with changing the website at all.
Eli.
